The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2013-02-11 13-081 ORDERCOUNCIL ACTION Item No. 13-081 Date: February 11, 2013 Item/Subject: Order, Authorizing the City of Bangor to Participate in an Amicus Brief to the U.S. Supreme Court Supporting the Repeal of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act. Responsible Department: Executive/Council Commentary: The United States Supreme Court will be hearing an appeal from a U.S. Circuit Court decision regarding the legality of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act under the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution. A coalition of public and private sector organizations have formed and are preparing an Amicus Brief (also known as a Friend of the Court Brief) which will be supporting the repeal of Defense of Marriage Act. The City has been invited to participate in the Brief by signing on indicating its support to repeal the Act. There is no cost to the City to participate. The Order, if approved, would authorize the Council Chair or his designee to sign the Brief on behalf of the City Council. This was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Government Operations Committee on February 4, 2013 by a vote of 4 in favor, 1 opposed. Manager's Comments: Associated Information: Order, Background Information Budget Approval: Legal Approval: Introduced for: X Passage — New Business First Reading Referral Department Head V 1 •: 1 City Manager Finance Director Page _ of 13-081 FEBRUARY 119 2013 Assigned to Councilor Baldacci CI`T'Y OF BANGOR (TITLE.) Order, Authorizing the City of Bangor to Participate in an Amicus Brief to the U.S. Supreme Court Supporting the Repeal of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court will hear an appeal from a U.S. Circuit Court Decision concerning the legality of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act under the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution of the United States; and WHEREAS, the City of Bangor has been invited to participate in this issue by signing onto an Amicus Brief, which will be supporting the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act; and WHEREAS, the Defense of Marriage Act is a federal law that recognizes a legal marriage as one between a man and a woman only; and WHEREAS, the voters of the State of Maine have recently decided to recognize same sex marriages as legal marriages as well; and WHEREAS, this creates a conflict between federal and state law that has both implications and consequences for employers and individuals. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANGOR that: The City Council Chair or his designee, on behalf of the City Council, is hereby authorized to sign the Amicus Brief indicating the Council's support to repeal the Federal Defense of Marriage Act. IN CITY COUNCIL February 11, 2013 Councilor Longo indicated he had a conflick to interest. Motion made and seconded that Councilor Longo did not have a conflict of interest Passed Motion Doubted Vote: 7-2 Councilors Voting Yes: Baldacci, Blanchette, Gallant, Hawes, Nealley, Sprague, Durgin Councilors Voting No: Civiello, Longo Passed CITY C 13-081 r FEBRUARY 11, 2013 -----Original Message ----- From: Ali Vander Zanden <avanderzanden(@eoualitymaine org> To: joe.baldacci <ioe.baldacciObangormaine qov>; charles.longo <charles.longo0bangormaine cov>; benjamin.sprague <beniamin spragueii,sbangormaine qov> Cc: Beth Allen <ballen equalitymaine oro> Sent: Wed, Jan 30, 2013 10:38 am Subject: Bangor City Council- support repealing DOMA? Dear Councilors Baldacci, Longo and Sprague, Thank you so much for your support of the marriage referendum! I'm writing to ask if you could continue your advocacy by taking a position against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). As you know, DOMA is the federal law that discriminates against married same-sex couples even though states like Maine now recognize our relationships. Basically, I'm asking the City of Bangor to join the Cities of New York, Seattle, Boston, Los Angeles and others, including the long list of businessesbelow, in opposing. DOMA because it is harmful to married couples and an extra burden on employers. The deadline for joining the amicus brief, which will be part of the marriage cases currently before the Supreme Court, is February 14. There's more information below. To sign -on to the amicus brief, they would just need to e-mail Vickie Henry, a lawyer at GLAD, at vhenry0glad.org and myself at avanderzanden@equalitymaine ora Many thanks for your help, and please let me know if I can answer any questions. Ali Dear City Council of Bangor, I'm writing to ask that the City of Bangorconsider signing an amicus brief in the U.S. Supreme Court about how DOMA affects employers. We are asking signers to commit by February 14, 2013. Here is the background. A coalition of leading businesses and employers is forming to advise the United States Supreme Court on the ways in which DOMA harms businesses and employers. Judges in the First and Second Circuit Courts of Appeals and the Districts of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Northern District of California, and Southern District of New York have found DOMA unconstitutional under the Equal Protection guarantee of the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court has now agreed to hear an appeal from the Second Circuit in Windsor v. United States of America. We would welcome the City of Bangor's participation. Would the City of Bangor agree In principle to join (subject to your approval of the final draft)? There will be no cost for participation. Bingham McCutchen is authoring the brief pro bono. It will make the following broad points. Under DOMA, legally married same-sex couples are not recognized as "married" for the purposes of federal laws and programs. As a result, an employer in a state that now or has licensed same-sex couples to marry must: • Discriminate among its own employees in the benefits provided, because employees married to same-sex spouses are ineligible for numerous federal benefits that depend on marriage status (such as FMLA leave, COBRA, flexible savings accounts, and HIPPA protections), or else incur costly workarounds; • Bear costs and administrative burdens imposed by the dual treatment of married persons; • Administer two sets of benefit policies, and incur the direct costs of "grossing up" salaries to compensate for tax disadvantages; and 13-081 Bear the burden of explaining to employees why some are being discriminated against. FEBRUARY 11, 2013 In sum, DOMA Imposes on.employers enormous costs in time, money, and morale. With over 100,000 same-sex couples legally married in the United States, DOMA's burden is growing. This is a business issue for employers. The following 93 companies signed such a brief in cases known as Gill (1 Circuit) and Gohnski (9"' Circuit): Abt Associates Aetna Inc. Akamai Technologies Alere AppNexus Arnold & Porter Baker & McKenzie Biogen Idec Inc. Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Mass. BNY Mellon Boston Community Capital Boston Foundation Boston Medical Center Bright Horizons Family Solutions, Inc. Broadcom Burns & Levinson LLP Calvert Foundation Calvert Investments CBS Chubb City and County of San Francisco City of Boston City of Cambridge City of Los Angeles City of New York City of Santa Monica City of Seattle City of West Hollywood, Clean Yield Asset :'„?anagp!ne�t - Communispace Constellation Energy Group, Inc. Diageo Eastern Bank eBay Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP Electronic Arts Exelon Corporation Fitcorp Foley Hoag LLP Futterman Dupree Dodd Croley Maier LLP Gammelg9rden Gap Goodwin Procter LLP Google, Inc. Goulston & Storrs, P.C. Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce Integrated Archive Systems (IAS) Jazz Pharmaceutical Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group, LLC Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel Lafayette & .Kumagai LLP Levi Strauss & Co. Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein Loring, Wolcott & Coolidge Trust, LLC Mass Envelope Co., d/b/a Grossman Marketing Massachusetts Association of Health Plans (MAHP) Massachusetts Biotechnology Council McGraw Hill Microsoft National Fire Protection Association National Grid USA Nationwide New Balance New England Cryogenic Center Nike Nixon Peabody LLP Ogilivy & Mather Onyx Out & Equal Parthenon Group Partners HealthCare Reproductive Science Center of New England Retailers Association of Massachusetts (RAM) Ropes & Gray LLP Salera Consulting Seattle Metro Chamber of Commerce Seyfarth Shaw LLP Skyworks Solutions Inc. Starbucks State Street Corp. Stonyfield Farm Sullivan & Worcester LLP Sun Life Time Warner Cable Trillium Asset Management Corp. Valdez Noor Todd & Doyle LLP Viacom W/S Development Associates LLC Xerox ZipCar Zynga 13-081 FEBRUARY 11, 2013 Mass Financial Services Co. Mass Mutual We will be reaching out to these employers for this Supreme Court stage as well as additional prospects. If you have any questions, or anyone needs information, feel free to contact me. Ultimately, to join this brief, the City of Bangor would need to indicate its assent to participate to Bingham McCutchen. For more information or questions about the amicus brief, please contact Vickie Henry at 617-778-6957 or vhenry olad.ora. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Best, Vickie