By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
S.F. Supervisor Matt Dorsey
The law requires city contractors to offer same-sex domestic partners the same benefits as married straight couples, and Matt Dorsey says marriage equality means it's no longer needed.
San Francisco Supervisor Matt Dorsey has proposed getting rid of a law requiring city contractors to offer benefits to employees’ same-sex domestic partners — and some San Franciscans are not pleased.
Keep up with the latest in LGBTQ+ news and politics. Sign up for The Advocate's email newsletter.
Dorsey, who is gay, says the Equal Benefits Ordinance, which went into effect in 1997, is no longer needed because of marriage equality. The ordinance was adopted when same-sex couples didn’t have access to legally recognized marriages, and it required companies doing business with the city to offer the same benefits to same-sex domestic partners that they offer to married straight couples.
Dorsey told The Bay Area Reporter that repealing the law or ending its enforcement would save the city money and broaden the selection of companies with which the city could contract.
“From the data I’ve seen, only about 45 percent of large firms in the U.S. offer domestic partner benefits today — and the numbers are declining in the post-Obergefell era,” he said, referring to the 2015 U.S. Supreme Court ruling for nationwide marriage equality. “That means 55 percent of large firms — and who knows how many small firms — are banned from even bidding on goods or services contracts with San Francisco.”
“When competitive bidding is made less competitive, the goods and services taxpayers contract for are more expensive,” he continued. “I would be the first to argue that the added expense was entirely defensible when the underlying principle of the Equal Benefits Ordinance was equity for same-sex couples who were legally denied access to marriage. It is not defensible today.”
To the San Francisco Chronicle, he noted, “Even a marginal savings of just 5 percent would result in $290 million — more than the entire budget of our Recreation and Park Department.” It’s not clear how much doing away with the ordinance would save, however.
Some current and former supervisors pointed out that marriage equality may be in danger, what with conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas saying Obergefell should be overturned. For the court to overturn the ruling, it would have to take up another marriage equality case, but Kim Davis, the anti-LGBTQ+ former Kentucky county clerk, is trying to get one to the court.
Scrapping the Equal Benefits Ordinance is “a totally misplaced priority, especially given the hate climate that exists today and the Supreme Court talking about repealing gay marriage and all the anti-trans stuff,” former Supervisor Tom Ammiano, who is also gay, told the Chronicle.
Ammiano additionally told the Reporter, “It’s very disturbing to hear, especially from a gay man. Harvey Milk always said you’ve got to always look over your shoulder. It’s very disturbing that someone from our community thinks an ordinance like this isn’t worth it.”
He said some older couples, gay and straight alike, still choose domestic partnerships instead of marriage for financial reasons.
Another gay former supervisor, Jeff Sheehy, told the Reporter, “Why are we going backward? Why are we closing a door we may need?”
Current Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, also a gay man, said he’s not opposed to reconsidering the ordinance, but the process has to be well thought out. The law has “a really important history, and we have to treat it carefully,” he told the Chronicle.
Dorsey said he’s looking at a couple of options, either repealing the law or ceasing to enforce it. If he introduces a repeal proposal, it could include a provision reinstating it if Obergefell is overturned, he told the Reporter.
Charlie Kirk DID say stoning gay people was the 'perfect law' — and these other heinous quotes