County Will Appeal Same-Sex Marriage Ruling
Rachel Ward,WXXI
http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1232701§ionID=1
ROCHESTER, NY (2008-02-22) The county will appeal a decision that requires it
to extend medical benefits to same-sex partners. A ruling earlier this month
from the 4th Division Appellate Court determined that the same-sex spouse of an
employee of Monroe Community College must be extended medical benefits by the
college. The couple was married in Canada, and had also had a civil union
performed in Vermont.
County executive Brooks says she doesn't think the decision to appeal is a
"hostile move."
"This is not a statement about any position at all on same sex marriage, this
an appeal that looks at the current state policy. And what we're saying is,
this is a ruling that flies in the face of state policy, a policy that has been
embraced by the people of Monroe County and New York State."
But Gary Pudup, executive director the Rochester area's New York Civil
Liberties Union chapter, says Brooks' position that the appeal won't be
perceived as hostile to members of the gay community locally, and won't deter
Canadian same sex couples from visiting or moving here, defies common sense.
"If you were in that situation [of being a same sex couple, would you move into
this area faced with this administrative decision? I think clearly the answer
to that is 'no'. Let's hope that Rochester and Monroe County would be viewed as
a progressive area where people would feel comfortable to come and live in, not
a place where equal rights is going to be fought by the government."
Brooks says that the county has always said that when New York State recognizes
same-sex marriage, the county would comply with that policy, but for right now,
not extending partner benefits is a "dollars and cents" move.
A spokesman for the county says that there are no conclusions about how much it
would cost the county to extend benefits to same-sex partners, but that they've
come to the conclusion that it's not something that they think they can afford.
Pudup says the decision at the appellate court was unanimously approved by five
judges. He says the consensus of the judges implies that the county's appeal
doesn't have much of a chance.
Key gay marriage battle set for Monroe County
Reported by: Evan Axelbank
http://rochesterhomepage.net/content/fulltext/?cid=14631
Friday, Feb 22, 2008 @06:19pm EST
With the bell ringing for another round in the gay marriage fight, Executive
Maggie Brooks is doing her best to take the word "gay," out of the equation. "I
will tell you that the county's motivation is not based on any moral judgement
or any personal opinion or political opinion that I have," Brooks said.
For Brooks, it boils down to this: Does the lower court's new ruling, which
requires MCC to pay benefits to a lesbian couple, now supercede New York's law
that marriage is between a man and a woman?
"I want to know if Monroe County should be complying with the will of the
people of New York state, as demonstrated through a policy enacted by the
legislature, or if we are now in a new position of following a new precedent
set by the courts," she said.
But with gay rights groups, Brook's reasoning doesn't add up. "I don't know
what it's about for her, I know that for the families that I know, it's about
protecting our families and fairness, and extending rights to people who are
denied rights," said Christopher Hinesley, the director of the Genesee Valley
Gay Alliance. Chris Hinesley's Gay Alliance doesn't agree with the county on
much when it comes to gay marriage, but they jumped all over Brook's claim that
her appeal is about protecting taxpayers. "The amount of money that's likely to
be spent on an appeal like this is probably more than the actual benefits that
the county is trying to deny same-sex couples," Hinesley said.
Monroe County appeals Supreme Court ruling to recognize same-sex marriages
WHEC
http://www.whec.com/article/stories/s354677.shtml?cat=565
Monroe County does not want to recognize same sex marriages. On Friday County
Executive Maggie Brooks announced Monroe County’s decision to file a motion
to appeal the recent ruling of the New York State Supreme Court that same-sex
marriages performed in other states or nations must be recognized in New York
State.
This ruling is a result of a recent case against Monroe Community College by an
employee who wanted medical benefits for her same-sex partner.
The couple had a civil union ceremony in Vermont and later married in Ontario,
Canada, where same-sex marriages are legally recognized. The couple wanted
their foreign marriage be recognized in New York State, and they wanted to
receive medical benefits from the college.
New York State law recognizes marriage as an institution strictly between a man
and a woman. Monroe County believes same-sex marriage is contrary to that law.
Monroe Dems: Brooks' Appeal `Frivolous'
by Rich Turner, RNews
Published Feb 22, 2008
http://www.rnews.com/Story_2004.cfm?ID=58561&rnews_story_type=18
Monroe County Democratic Minority Leader Harry Bronson calls the Brooks
Administration's appeal to the same sex marriage court ruling made earlier this
month frivolous and a waste of taxpayer dollars.
He supports the same sex marriage ruling.
Bronson released a statement saying: “The fight is about ensuring that all
residents of Monroe County are protected by the same civil rights. It is a
matter of fairness and equity."
“We as a county need to stop trying to divide people and start trying to
bring people together, that is the only way our many challenges can truly be
addressed."
Brooks to appeal same-sex marriage decision
Erica Bryant
Staff writer, Democrat and Chronicle
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080223/NEWS01/802230319
(February 23, 2008) — Though same-sex weddings cannot be performed legally in
New York, the state must — at least until a Monroe County appeal is heard —
recognize the marriage of Chili residents Patricia Martinez and Lisa Ann
Golden.
Their union, legally consecrated in Canada in 2004, was not immediately
accepted by Martinez's employer, Monroe Community College. In 2005, she sued to
get health care benefits for Golden. On Feb. 1, a court ruled in her favor.
On Friday, Monroe County Executive Maggie Brooks announced that the county
would appeal the appellate court ruling to protect taxpayers.
"We certainly cannot ignore the definition of marriage that currently exists
under New York state law," she said in a statement.
As long as the Martinez case ruling stands, same-sex marriages legally
performed elsewhere will be entitled to the same treatment under state law as
marriages between a man and a woman. This gives such couples access to
inheritance rights, for example, and the right to make medical decisions for
each other.
Though many local employers already offer benefits to same-sex couples, others
must consider how the ruling will change their policies. The implications have
left same-sex marriage supporters celebrating and gay marriage opponents hoping
the Court of Appeals reverses the decision.
Meanwhile, many are lobbying the state Legislature to pass a law regarding
same-sex marriage that will take jurisdiction over the matter out of the
courts.
The state Court of Appeals said in 2006 that same-sex couples are not allowed
to marry in New York, unless the legislature passes a law legalizing same-sex
marriage. In the Martinez case ruling, the Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial
Department, said that same-sex marriages legally consecrated elsewhere must be
recognized in New York, unless the Legislature passes a law to deny their
legitimacy.
Martinez, 52, and Golden, 40, stress that their fight is not just about access
to health care benefits. They can sleep easier knowing that they have the legal
rights and protections married couples have.
In Alan Hevesi's 2004 statement in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage, the
former state comptroller said there are 1,049 federal benefits and
responsibilities afforded by marriage, in addition to hundreds more offered by
New York.
Before, same-sex couples had to draw up legal documents to simulate marriage.
"The only thing we as lawyers had to work with was contract law," said
Martinez's attorney, Jeffrey Wicks. Christopher Hinesley, the director of the
Gay Alliance of Genesee Valley, said that Hevesi's statements pushed many
same-sex couples in New York to start going to Canada to get married.
Evolving laws
The Martinez decision pushes New York into evolving legal territory. "Thousands
of employers are going to be wondering what to do," said Martinez. The
Rochester area's three biggest employers — University of Rochester, Wegmans
Food Markets Inc. and Eastman Kodak Co. — already provide benefits to
same-sex married couples. UR and Kodak provide domestic partner benefits.
Wegmans provides health and dental benefits if the couple is united by a
ceremony that happened someplace where same-sex marriage is legal.
Since Martinez filed her suit, Monroe Community College's contract with the
Civil Service Employees Union has started providing benefits for domestic
partnerships. MCC conducts its contract negotiations separately from Monroe
County, and county spokesman Noah Lebowitz says the county does not offer any
benefits to same-sex couples. The towns of Greece and Henrietta and Paychex
Inc. also do not offer such benefits.
Due to the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act, same-sex marriages recognized
in New York still will not have access to benefits bestowed by the federal
government. This act defines "marriage" as a bond between a man and a woman and
"spouse" as a married partner of the opposite sex for federal matters, and
federal law supersedes state law on many marriage issues.
This means, for example, that same-sex couples who can now file state income
taxes as a married couple still must file their federal taxes as single.
Neither federal pension and private-sector pension benefits nor certain health
care plans regulated by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act are
legally due to same-sex couples.
Xerox Corp. and Bausch & Lomb Inc., which provide benefits for same-sex
couples, along with Kodak, are members of the Business Coalition for Benefits
Tax Equity, a group that wants the IRS to adjust tax code to help companies
that extend benefits to employees in same-sex relationships.
Under current IRS regulations, the value of nonspouse, nondependent benefits is
included in employee wages and increases the amount of tax paid by the employee
and employer. Benefits provided to spouses or children are not included in
wages, resulting in lower taxes for heterosexual married couples.
About 1.2 million people said they were part of same-sex partnerships in the
2000 census, about 0.6 percent of the total adult population.
'Opposed to this'
Rabbi James Appel of the Congregation Shema Yisrael in Irondequoit says the
Martinez decision absolutely should be appealed.
"I think the majority of people in the county and the whole country are opposed
to this," he said. "Judges are moving us in this direction against the moral
attitudes and standards of the rest of the country."
The Rev. Sammy L King of Trinity Missionary Baptist Church in Rochester is also
opposed to same-sex marriage.
"It's not that we don't love gays and lesbians, and reach out to them," he
said. "Legalization can come in the state of New York, but in the eyesight of
God, (same-sex marriage) can never be legalized."
Appel has supported an explicit state ban on same-sex marriage and the
recognition of same-sex marriage, similar to those found in more than half of
the states.
Last year, Gov. Eliot Spitzer introduced a bill to legalize same-sex marriage.
The Assembly passed a similar bill. No action was taken in the state Senate.
The four state senators who represent this region all oppose same-sex marriage
legislation.
Sen. Joe Robach, R-Greece, says he supports civil unions but not gay marriage.
Sen. James Alesi, R-Perinton, says he supports civil rights and
anti-discrimination legislation but draws a line at same-sex marriage.
"The majority of my constituents are opposed," said Alesi, who does not expect
the Senate to take up the issue this session.
Wicks believes that his client is on solid legal footing because New York
recognizes marriages that are not legal in New York, such as common law
marriages. The appellate court ruling states: "For well over a century, New
York has recognized marriages solemnized outside of New York unless they fall
into two categories of exception: marriage, the recognition of which is
prohibited by the 'positive law' of New York and marriages involving incest or
polygamy, both of which fall within the prohibitions of 'natural law.'"
Brooks disagrees. A county statement issued Friday states: "According to the
New York state law, marriage is an institution that exists strictly between a
man and a woman. Foreign marriages are recognized so long as they are not
contrary to New York state policy. Monroe County currently holds the position
that same-sex marriage is in fact contrary to New York state policy."
A sense of validation
Martinez has said that she is prepared to fight her case all the way up to the
U.S. Supreme Court.
In the meantime, Jo and Christine Meleca-Voigt, two Henrietta women who were
married in Canada in 2005, are trying to pursue joint medical insurance in
light of the recent decision.
Jo Meleca-Voigt said the court ruling has made her marriage feel more real.
"Before when we would drive into Canada, as soon as we crossed the border it
felt like we were legitimate," she said. "(After the court decision) I feel
more legitimate and validated here."
Doreen Peever, a lay chaplain of the Unitarian Congregation of Niagara in
Ontario, Canada, performed Martinez and Golden's 2004 wedding ceremony.
She says she's conducted 208 same-sex marriage ceremonies since they became
legal in Canada in 2003. The vast majority of couples have been from the United
States.
Peever says the Unitarian Church has been performing gay marriages since the
1970s. "I don't understand what the big deal is," she said. "It doesn't
threaten family values; it reinforces family values. These are new families."
Brooks called the Martinez victory "a clear misinterpretation of the law." Her
statement concludes: "To expand (health care) benefits to same-sex couples is
to ignore the will of the people of Monroe County and New York state.
Therefore, the county is seeking an appeal of the recent ruling in this case."
Martinez anticipates that the success of her case in appellate court means more
people will be heading north to get married.
"If I weren't married already, I'd be leaving skid marks on that Peace Bridge
going to Canada," she said.
EBRYANT@DemocratandChronicle.com