Montgomery became the first county in Maryland to extend spousal benefits to the domestic partners of its gay and lesbian employees with a County Council vote of 6 - 3 on November 30. But even in this relatively liberal suburb adjoining Washington, DC, opponents immediately began organizing to place a repeal initiative before voters. In Maryland, only the cities of Baltimore and Takoma Park have similar benefits; on the other side of the capital, Arlington County, Virginia enacted them but is going to have to win a case before its state Supreme Court to be able to offer them.

The Montgomery County package includes health care, pension and family leave benefits. To qualify, a couple must attest that they are both at least 18 years old, are not related to each other, have lived together for at least 12 months, and are responsible for each other's welfare; they must also present some evidence of shared financial obligations, such as a joint lease or joint checking account.

The measure introduced by Councilmember Derick Berlage September 28 is called the Employee Benefits Equity Act, and he told the Council that, "This is not a benefits bill. This is a bill to combat discrimination," since same-gender couples cannot qualify their partners for benefits through legal marriage. As originally drafted, the language of the bill stated that, "an employee's partnership with a person of the same sex can have all the attributes of a marriage except the legal recognition of marriage," although that passage was removed in the process of building support for the measure.

The civil rights approach convinced initially reluctant County Executive Douglas Duncan to sign the measure, as he said, "This is an equity issue, and the costs here are minimal enough [projected at less than $400,000 per year, perhaps only $100,000] that it doesn't cause me a great deal of worry." Others made more positive statements about "righting a wrong" and "doing the right thing."

To Council President Isaiah Leggett, the civil rights tenor of the bill called for extending the coverage to unmarried heterosexual couples as well, but only Councilmember Blair Ewing joined Leggett as that much more expensive option was defeated 7 - 2. While Councilmember Nancy Dacek opposed both Leggett's amendment and the gay-only bill, she called for extending the benefits to an even broader range of interdependent relationships.

All three Councilmembers who voted against the bill, including two of the Council's three Republicans, expressed concerns about the Council interfering in an area normally dealt with in collective bargaining negotiations with unions. That had been a significant concern for County Executive Duncan as well. Councilmember Marilyn Praisner rejected the civil rights approach, in the belief that if there were any meaningful level of discrimination, lawsuits would have been filed and won.

The Councilmembers didn't have to look far to see another kind of opposition altogether: members of the Women's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) sat in the front row with yellow signs reading, "Say No to Sodomy Subsidies." WCTU national public relations director Bunny Galladora referred to the "unnatural, immoral and illegal act of sodomy," although Maryland's sodomy law has already been invalidated in court.