An ordinance that would make Toledo the second Ohio city to offer gay and unmarried couples the chance to register their "domestic partnership" passed through a city council committee yesterday and is set for a vote Tuesday.

The registry would not grant couples any direct benefits or bestow the legal rights of marriage.

But by paying the city a $25 fee, the couples would receive a certificate and cards to carry that proclaim their partnership.

City Law Director John Madigan told council's law and criminal justice committee that such a registry would not violate Ohio's voter-approved 2004 "Defense of Marriage" amendment, which defines marriage as a union strictly between a man and a woman.

Mr. Madigan said he reached his conclusion based on an Ohio Supreme Court ruling in July in which the justices found that the marriage amendment does not preclude the state's domestic-violence law from applying to unmarried couples.

To violate the amendment, a statute would have to attempt to create a marriage substitute, and "this domestic partnership registry will not establish anything that approximates marriage," Mr. Madigan said.

The five members of the public who spoke during the hearing all were in favor of the registry. Some framed passing the ordinance as a civil rights issue.

"My partner and I are taxpayers. My partner and I are property owners. My partner and I are voters," said William Hill, of the Old West End. "What my partner and I are not is citizens of the first class."

"It may be a small step legislatively, but it's a monstrously large step for those who will benefit from it," Mr. Hill said.

Proponents also argued the registry would give a token of legitimacy to relationships, and that could help residents access health care and other benefits from employers that recognize domestic partnerships, such as Owens Corning and the University of Toledo.

Eleven couples, two of whom are opposite sex, have registered for domestic partner benefits since UT began offering them in early 2006, a university spokesman said.

City police and fire unions also have negotiated benefits in their collective bargaining agreements to take sick leave or funeral leave for domestic partners as they do for immediate family.

Councilman Joe McNamara, sponsor of the ordinance, said that having a registry could contribute to Toledo's economic growth by helping the city attract and retain the "creative class" - workers who are said to be generally socially liberal. The registry could also put Toledo "at the lead in social issues," Mr. McNamara said.

During the hearing Cindy Voller, a lawyer in East Toledo, said the city already has lost some unmarried couples.

"I have had clients who moved away from Toledo because they felt unprotected in our community," she said. "These are professional people who sought other cities that they felt were more accepting of their relationships."

The Cleveland suburb of Cleveland Heights became the first Ohio city with a domestic partnership registry after an initiative to create it passed in November, 2003, with 55 percent of the vote. Cleveland Heights has since registered 165 couples, some from as far away as California and who applied through the mail, she said.

A challenge to the registry by a Cleveland Heights councilman was rejected in 2004 by a Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court judge.

Mr. McNamara said that he believes the majority of Toledo residents would support a domestic-partner registry, despite the statewide support three years ago for the amendment barring gay marriage.

"We're elected to make decisions that are in the best interests of Toledo, and I think this issue is," said Mr. McNamara, who declined to speculate about who might oppose his registry proposal at Tuesday's meeting.

"No one on council has told me they're going to not support this."

TOLEDOANS have nothing to fear and everything to hope for in the modest ordinance that goes before City Council tomorrow to allow gay people to publicly register a "domestic partnership" in the city.

The registry, conceived by Councilman Joe McNamara, cannot be equated with gay marriage, nor is it in any way a slap at conventional marriage. Simply put, it is an opportunity for local gay couples to have their relationships recognized in a manner that has been accepted by a growing number of progressive communities around the country. At least seven states already provide for domestic partnerships, and many companies provide benefits for same-sex partners.

More to the point, John Madigan, the city law director, says the ordinance would not violate the spirit or letter of the constitutional amendment approved by Ohio voters in 2004, which defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

At a Council hearing Friday, Mr. Madigan said he arrived at his opinion by studying the Ohio Supreme Court's ruling that the 2004 amendment does not preclude application of the state domestic violence law to unmarried couples, gay or straight.

The proposed registry, the law director said, "will not establish anything that approximates marriage."

What it will do, we believe, is give gay couples the comfort of acceptance and help promote Toledo as an inclusive community, a place that accepts anyone and everyone willing to work hard and make the city a progressive community in the most noble sense of the word.

Undoubtedly there will be those who feel the ordinance is tantamount to a declaration of gay marriage by another name, but the measure does not prescribe any direct benefits or legal rights. Partners who are 18 or older, not married to anyone else, and are not blood relatives would receive a certificate from the city that adds at least a token of legitimacy to their relationship.
 

A feeling of acceptance by others is among the most powerful of human emotions and we believe a domestic partnership registry would be a force for establishing Toledo as a place where everyone is accepted for who they are and what they're willing to contribute to make the city a truly progressive place to live.

Toledo City Council yesterday approved an ordinance making Toledo the first large city in Ohio to offer gay and other unmarried but committed couples the opportunity to register their relationship with city hall.

Under the ordinance, couples will be able to obtain recognition of their “domestic partnership” from the clerk of council.

The purpose of the registry is to create an official list which employers can use to verify their employees’ relationships when they offer benefits to unmarried partners, supporters said.

The measure passed 10-2, with Councilmen Rob Ludeman and Joe Birmingham — both Republicans and both set to leave office when their terms end this year — casting the no votes.

Mr. Ludeman gave a detailed explanation for his position, saying among other things he thought it would create a cost burden on city taxpayers because the city could wind up recording the domestic relationships of couples far beyond the city’s borders. Such a record-keeping function, he said, should be a county one..

And he cited a “very personal reason based on my faith. This is one more attempt to tear down the institution of marriage between a man and a woman,” Mr. Ludeman said.

Mr. Birmingham did not explain his vote.

Councilman Joe McNamara, who introduced the measure, said the ordinance does not create same-sex marriage, which is banned in Ohio under the 2004 “Defense of Marriage” constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union strictly between a man and a woman.

Mr. McNamara said the ordinance would tell the business world that Toledo is a tolerant, diverse city. He added that the registry won’t cost the city anything, but said it would put Toledo on the map as a progressive city.

“I think I was elected, in large part, for trying new things and new ideas,” said Mr. McNamara, who was elected to council in 2006.

Before the vote, he said, “Toledo sometimes seems to be in a rut. This type of progressive legislation helps our reputation [and] our work force.”

Present in council chambers to show his support was Lucas County Commissioner Ben Konop, who said he would explore having the county enact a similar measure administratively, although it cannot pass ordinances.

“We want to make sure this a region that is progressive and protects civil rights,” Mr. Konop said.

The domestic partnership registry lessens the administrative burden on employers and other entities beginning to deal with providing rights to domestic partners that had been reserved for spouses, advocates have said.

In addition to health benefits when approved by employers, a central registry would provide official recognition when domestic partners exercise rights to visit their partners in the hospital and pick up children at schools.

The other Ohio city with a domestic partnership registry is Cleveland Heights, on which Toledo’s ordinance was based.

That city’s registry was created after an initiative passed in November, 2003. Since then, 165 couples have registered, some from as far away as California and who applied through the mail.

In Toledo, applicants would pay a $25 fee and receive a certificate and a card to carry.

Both members of the partnership would sign an affidavit stating that they are in an intimate relationship, share the same residence, are at least 18, are not married to anyone else, and are not blood relatives.

The partnership could be dissolved with a notice of termination filed by either party. Neither party could form a new partnership until their previous partnership has been officially terminated or the previous partner dies.

Michelle Stecker, a lawyer who helped write the ordinance, said she and her partner, Carol Bresnahan, vice provost of the University of Toledo, secured partner benefits, but then struggled over how to prove their relationship, even though they own a house together and share their financial assets.

They ended up using their health club membership as evidence of their relationship.

Yesterday was their seventh anniversary as a committed couple, and they hope to be the first to register as domestic partners in Toledo, Ms. Stecker said.

“We need to have something that’s uniform where all these different public and private entities can say, ‘Yes, they are a couple,’ to have access to emergency rooms and other domestic partner benefits,” Ms. Stecker said.

She said she has worked on the legislation for more than a year.

Ms. Bresnahan said, “I think it’s exactly the right thing to do. It’s very consistent with what the city wants to do, which is attracting talented people to come to Toledo and to stay here if they already live here.”

The ordinance received fast-paced consideration from a council that often subjects controversial measures to months of discussion.

The proposed ordinance was introduced in council’s agenda review meeting just a week before yesterday’s vote.

In a hearing on Friday, city Law Director John Madigan told council’s law and criminal justice committee that the registry would not violate the “Defense of Marriage” amendment.

Mr. McNamara noted that the city’s Department of Human Resources maintains a domestic partnership registry for city police officers and firefighters who have negotiated benefits in their collective bargaining agreements to take sick leave or funeral leave for domestic partners as they do for immediate family.

The leader of the Toledo Catholic Diocese yesterday urged parishioners to oppose the city’s creation of a domestic-partner registry, but the only thing that can slow the legislation now is a mayoral veto.

A statement issued by Bishop Leonard P. Blair, read at Sunday Mass, said: “We ought not to be encouraging cohabitation by giving it legal recognition as an alternative to marriage.”

The bishop asked parishioners to “join me in opposing measures like the domestic-partnership registry, particularly when there has been little time for public discussion.”

Mayor Carty Finkbeiner has until the end of the day Friday to act on legislation approved by City Council on Tuesday in a 10-2 vote. The legislation allows same-sex or heterosexual unmarried couples to register as domestic partners, providing employers who want to offer benefits to unmarried couples a way to check their relationship status.

Mayor Finkbeiner’s spokesman, Brian Schwartz, says the mayor has not decided what he will do.

The mayor has 10 days to sign or veto the legislation or do nothing, which has the same effect as signing the ordinance.

The legislation passed with one vote more than the nine votes required to override a veto.

“I don’t think [the legislation] was rushed through,” said Councilman Joe McNamara, who introduced the registry as a way to announce Toledo’s tolerance for diversity in its desire to attract residents.

“Members of council had it for weeks. We had a public hearing. There were multiple articles in The Blade. No one came to the hearing in opposition. It went through normal channels,” he said.

The issue passed council a week after it first became public in an article in The Blade on Nov. 6, the first of two articles and one editorial published before council’s vote Nov. 13.

But Councilman Rob Ludeman, one of the two “no” votes on the registry issue, also said it was rushed.

“I was disappointed with the way the whole issue was rushed through council almost as if some council members were trying to get it done before there could be much public comment,” Mr. Ludeman said.

Although no one from the diocese spoke at a public hearing on the measure Nov. 9, Mr. Ludeman said council members received a letter from the bishop’s office, urging the process be slowed, before the Nov. 13 vote.

Under the legislation, couples would pay $25 to register with the clerk of City Council. Each member of the couple would be required to sign an affidavit stating they are in an intimate relationship, share a residence, are at least 18 years old, and are not blood relatives.

David Mann, president of EqualityToledo Community Action, which long has worked for registry legislation, said such a law assists Toledo’s families.

“We strongly believe this will only help Toledo families get access to health care,” Mr. Mann said. “It’s the right thing to do. Toledoans deserve the right to have health care, and have access to their partner when they’re sick, and to join with their families in a family plan at a health club. All these things are what a domestic registry is about.

“As a Catholic, I’m sad to see that the bishop and the diocese has come out to oppose the domestic-partners registry,” he said.

But other area Catholics support the bishop’s position.

“I think it’s wonderful. I’m grateful for what he did,” said Joan Sprouse of Oregon after Mass at St. Catherine of Siena. “I think it was underhanded that they rushed it through without letting other people, people opposed to it, speak.”

“We voted against the gay rights as far as marriage and everything,” said Mary McGarry of Toledo, referring to the Ohio constitutional amendment passed by voters in 2004 that defined marriage as a commitment between a man and a woman.

“I don’t know what the big deal is. We’ve already prevoted that,” she said.

Bishop Blair’s letter to parishioners cited the constitutional amendment.

“Not only religious faith, but also human reason, tell us that the way to move our community forward is to strengthen the institution of marriage, not weaken it by giving legal standing to lifestyles that are not in keeping with the God-given meaning and purpose of marriage,” the statement says.

But Mr. McNamara says the domestic-partners registration in no way violates the “Defense of Marriage” amendment, an opinion also given by the city’s law director, John Madigan.

“It is not marriage. It doesn’t create any rights, benefits, or privileges that are associated with marriage,” Mr. McNamara said. “What this legislation is about is property rights,” he said, allowing people to confer property rights on whomever they wish.

Nor does the legislation introduce anything new to the city, he said, because the city already allows domestic-partner benefits in the fire and police department employees.

Domestic-partner benefits also are offered by the University of Toledo and Owens-Corning, he said.

Mr. McNamara is Catholic.

“I’m trying to serve God and my fellow man. I’m trying to help as many people as I possibly can. I think this legislation is good for Toledo.”

Mayor Carty Finkbeiner yesterday signed a law making Toledo the largest Ohio city to create a domestic-partner registry that allows same-sex couples a form of official recognition of their relationship.

Mr. Finkbeiner said that while he is a “strong Christian believer” who does not advocate alternative lifestyles, he does believe in minority rights and diversity.

The law, which takes effect in 30 days, was passed 10-2 last week by Toledo City Council. It requires the clerk of council to set up a registry for domestic-partner couples, whether of the same or opposite sexes.

Mr. Finkbeiner said the calls, e-mails, and letters he received were divided evenly between urging him to sign and urging a veto. Brian Schwartz, the mayor’s spokesman, said that as of Tuesday, the mayor received 69 communications against the ordinance and 63 in favor.

“The domestic-partnership registry is not about endorsing alternative lifestyles. It is about legal and insurance protection being extended to those considered the partners of any insurance-covered employee,” Mr. Finkbeiner said in a letter that he said he sent to each of the people who contacted him.