A compromise was proposed Tuesday to try to build support for a plan to expand eligibility for domestic partner benefits to more city employees.

Some Common Council members said they might be inclined to support the bill if it limited

eligibility for these benefits to employees who live within city boundaries.

Police officers, firefighters and some streets workers are not required to comply with

Buffalo's residency rule. The budget office said about half of all firefighters and police

officers live in the suburbs, as do a small number of streets laborers.

The issue surfaced as the Legislation Committee reviewed cost projections for expanding

eligibility for domestic partner benefits to all city employees. Budget Director Donna Estrich

said if only 4 percent — or nearly 100 employees — were to sign up for such

benefits, it would cost Buffalo $830,000 at a time when pension costs are skyrocketing and

state aid is being cut.

In a worst-case scenario, said Estrich, Buffalo would be saddled with $4.8 million in

additional costs if all single employees converted to family health insurance plans to cover

domestic partners.

Masten Council Member Demone A. Smith said it would be nice if the city could extend such

benefits to all employees.

"But it is not cost effective to do that," he said.

Delaware Council Member Michael J. LoCurto, who is co-sponsoring the bill, was not

persuaded by the argument.

"If 100 [city employees] got married next year, it would be the same thing, and nobody

would blink an eye," he said.

Some advocates have estimated that the costs of expanding eligibility for the benefits

would likely be under $52,000 a year.

"What price do we put on equality?" said bill co-sponsor David A. Rivera of Niagara.

Supporters argue that same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples who don't want to get

married should receive the same health benefits as other workers. Bryan Ball, president of

Stonewall Democrats of Western New York, spoke in support of the bill.

Budget officials said about half of all city workers are already eligible for domestic

partner benefits through labor contracts. To date, advocates said only two employees have

signed up for the coverage.

North Council Member Joseph Golombek Jr. proposed the compromise that would require city

residency in order to qualify for domestic partner benefits. Majority Leader Richard A.

Fontana voiced support for the revision.

The committee sent the bill to the full Council without recommendation. Lawmakers could

revisit the issue as early as next Tuesday.

Earlier Tuesday, the Council met in special session and voted 8-0 to approve an amended plan

for spending federal anti-poverty money. Lawmakers revised only 2 percent of Mayor Byron W.

Brown's spending plan, shifting $480,000 to fund additional neighborhood infrastructure work,

housing loans and job training initiatives.