Lexington, KY, Puts Moratorium on Domestic-Partner Benefits

As expected, the Urban County Council approved a moratorium that would prevent city employees from signing up for domestic partner benefits for three months.

But in a compromise move, council members agreed on an amendment to provide domestic partner benefits to the 20 city employees who had enrolled in the plan as of yesterday.

At issue now is whether Lexington Mayor Teresa Isaac will follow through on an earlier statement that she would veto a council-approved moratorium on domestic partner benefits.

Last night, Isaac said she would use the full 10 days afforded to her by law to make the decision. But she indicated she was leaning against the veto.

"Obviously, as they passed the amendment, it allows the employees to be covered by the policy," she said. "It would be less likely that I'd veto."

Members of the Bluegrass chapter of the Kentucky Fairness Alliance applauded council's decision to provide the domestic partner benefits while it continues to study the issue.

"The council was able to find the middle way between denying their employees health benefits and what they felt was a rush," said David Cupps, co-chair of the domestic partner benefits committee for Bluegrass Fairness. "But now there are 15 families who are covered."

Although 20 employees signed up for the benefits, only 15 families are covered because 10 employees said their partner also works for the city.

While the moratorium is in place, new employees or people who haven't signed up yet won't be allowed to choose the domestic partner benefits, said Wally Skiba, the city's human resources director.

The council will need to make its decision on whether the city will continue to offer the health benefits by October because open enrollment begins again in November, Skiba said.

Gary Johnson, a city employee in community corrections, and his partner, Brian Morris, were pleased with the council's decision to provide domestic partner coverage. They have been together for five years.

Morris, who is a horticulturist, has not had medical coverage for four years. During that time, he put off visits to the doctor and dentist.

Morris said he plans to take full advantage of his medical benefits that begin July 1. He already has scheduled a dental appointment.

"We're very happy that we have the domestic partner benefits," Johnson said. "At the same time, we're saddened that they may take that away and that others won't be getting the opportunity."

Council members approved the moratorium for reasons ranging from lack of information and time to study the issue and its financial implications to displeasure with Isaac because she did not consult them on her decision to offer domestic partner benefits.

Councilman Bill Farmer said that while he wanted to gather more information about the benefits, the moratorium was about "legislative versus administrative" and "how to build trust between a mayor and a council."

"This is just to do with how the mayor and the council work together, or in this instance, we don't," Farmer said.

Initially, the council intended to approve a complete domestic partner benefits freeze, which meant that the 20 employees who had enrolled in the plan would have lost coverage.

But council members felt it was unfair not to cover the employees and their partners because they did not discuss the issue until after open enrollment began.

"I checked on timing and they (employees) were told they could do this on May 1," said Councilwoman Jennifer Mossotti, who proposed the amendment. "We didn't talk about it until later."

Councilman Fred Brown disagreed with the decision to cover the partners, saying that the council shouldn't rush the decision and that it needed to get additional information from insurance companies.

This Council does not operate in reality. They are moving to condemn the water company - convert to city ownership, pass a smoking ban on private businesses AND this domestic partner benefits silliness. They also gave themselves an 8% raise while laying off employees due to "budget shortfalls."

At the rate this Council is going, few will be re-elected IMO. At least, I will be happy to support efforts to unseat those who exhibit willful stupidity.

What advocates of gay marriage/ partnerships, etc...miss is that there are consequences...like alimony, support, property division, liability, even child support.......it'll take a few years, but it'll catch up to them..

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.