Politics & Government

Controversy Absent in Domestic Partner Registry Conversation

Procedure, not philosophy, dominated Tuesday's council discussion.

At a time when Minnesota is poised for a major debate on same-sex marriage, in Hopkins is advancing without any apparent opposition.

City Council members on Tuesday directed acting City Manager Jim Genellie to run the details by the city attorney and inquire how it would affect police operations. But the members’ concerns were more about logistics than philosophy.

“I think providing an opportunity to recognize a domestic partnership is valuable both for the couple and for any officials that might have business with that home,” Councilman Bruce Rowan said. "I don't see any downside."

Find out what's happening in Hopkinswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Hopkins grad Peter Boisclair—now a student at Northland College, in Ashland, WI—first proposed the registry back in July. A registry would allow unmarried couples to certify their relationships with the city.

Supporters say such registration would make it easier for these couples to obtain hospital visitation rights and benefits from employers that offer domestic partner benefits.

Find out what's happening in Hopkinswith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The registry would be open to both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. Boisclair noted Tuesday that elderly couples in committed relationships could proclaim that they were together without losing widow’s or widower’s benefits from an earlier marriage—as would happen if they actually married.

But the registries can also be a symbolic vote in support of same-sex marriage while actual marriage remains off the table for gay and lesbian couples. Critics of gay marriage a PR stunt without the force of law.

Such views would seemingly draw domestic registries into the larger debate over gay marriage—a debate that will only grow as Minnesota approaches the 2012 vote on a constitutional amendment to limit marriage to heterosexual couples.

But that hasn’t happened so far in Hopkins. No one showed up to contest Boisclair’s proposal Tuesday, and none of the council members criticized it. Instead, they discussed procedural issues such as:

  • How would it affect police—particularly with regards to notifying next of kin, workload and domestic violence? 
    • Answer: We’ll run that by Police Chief Mike Reynolds, Genellie said.
  • Would it involve the city in legal claims and inheritance issues? 
    • Answer: No.
  • How much would registration cost? 
    • Answer: $30 to $40 should cover administrative costs, but the city would need to take a more thorough look, Genellie said.
  • Should it be open only to Hopkins residents or to both residents and those who work in Hopkins? 
    • Answer: That’s a topic for further discussion.
  • How can couples terminate their relationship? 
    • Answer: There would be a form. Some council members want to consider requiring couples to reregister periodically, while others countered that married couples aren’t required to do that.

“Administratively, this is very cut and dry,” Genellie said.

Perhaps the biggest worry was that the registry would be a public record accessible to anyone who wants to discriminate or harass those on the list. The city would likely include language on the form notifying people that the registry is public record, and registrants could potentially use a work address and alternate phone number instead of their home address.

Still, the proposal seems to have momentum behind it.

“I think it’s something we should do,” said Councilwoman Kristi Halverson.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here