Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Benefit plan petitions sent for validation

The Spokane City Council on Tuesday decided to ask for validation of signatures on a referendum petition seeking to roll back the granting of city employee benefits to domestic partners of unmarried employees.

Opponents of the domestic partnership benefits ordinance in June submitted just over 6,500 signatures on petitions seeking to block enactment of the change, approved by the City Council on April 25 in a 5-2 vote. Council members Bob Apple and Brad Stark voted against domestic partner benefits.

Mayor Jim West, an opponent of the measure, did not sign or veto the ordinance, but he was going to let it become law without his signature because the council had the five votes needed to override a veto.

The council Tuesday voted unanimously to send the signatures to the Spokane County auditor to check names against city voter registration rolls. The referendum could go on the ballot if the petition contains at least 5,145 signatures from registered city voters, or 10 percent of the number of voters who cast ballots in the last city election, in November 2003.

Proponents of the referendum said they hope to place the issue before voters this November. Council President Dennis Hession said a November vote appears most likely.

The council could approve the referendum without placing it on the ballot, but that is considered unlikely.

The ordinance would allow benefits to go to domestic partners of unmarried employees either in opposite-sex or same-sex relationships. Participants would have to sign an affidavit declaring their partnerships. Any extension of benefits is subject to union negotiations for all but 17 non-represented employees, plus the City Council.

Testimony Tuesday mirrored previous debates on the issue. Proponents said the ordinance provides fairness and equity to unmarried employees. Opponents argued it condones cohabitation, which they contend is morally wrong.

“Again it’s a slap in the face of family values,” said state Rep. John Ahern, of Spokane. He said the extension of benefits will add to city expenses at a time when more police are needed to stem rising crime.

He urged the council to adopt the referendum without sending it to the ballot. “If you don’t vote to throw this out, I guarantee the citizens will,” he said.

Cathy Donovan, one of the signature gatherers, said she spent 12 hours working on the petition and found overwhelming opposition to extending city benefits to domestic partners.

Councilman Al French argued that cost is not a factor. Council members have said the ordinance is part of a wider effort to contain the cost of benefits by having employees choose from a limited package of benefits.

“Married employees get compensated at a higher rate than single employees,” French said about the fairness of the ordinance.

One estimate received by city officials placed the cost of extending health benefits to unmarried partners near $176,000 a year if all city unions chose to take advantage of the possibility.

Apple, an opponent of the ordinance, said the cost might be negligible initially, but over time, it would become “extremely expensive” for the city. “Special benefits are just going to have to wait,” he said.

Brad Read, who served on the city’s Human Rights Commission when the ordinance was developed, said opponents of the measure are resorting to fear and misinformation in what amounts to a message of “intolerance and bigotry.” Read is a high school teacher and a member of Inland Northwest Equality, an organization formed in February to promote equality for gays and lesbians.