The seven members voted unanimously to offer insurance and other benefits to city employees' "adult designees" - relatives, friends or domestic partners - and those designees' children. The employee and designee must intend to live together indefinitely and prove they are financially dependent.

"This is an important day for our city and for our entire state," declared Councilman Dave Buhler.

Councilwoman Jill Remington Love, the plan's main architect along with Buhler and Eric Jergensen, said she hopes the gay community supports it - even though none of its members was present at the vote.

Their absence was notable, considering the 10 gay advocates who gathered at City Hall to watch Mayor Rocky Anderson sign his executive order last September. That marked the first time a Utah government body offered benefits to employees' domestic partners and children.

But the order has never been implemented because of a court challenge. And the council's ordinance trumps the executive order.

"It recognizes gay couples and other couples," Love said of the ordinance. "I hope the gay community understands we didn't take anything away from the [Anderson's] executive order. Our approach is more fair and addresses the needs of more employees."

Leaders of gay rights groups have said they support both plans.

Anderson also didn't show, though he renewed his criticism of the plan through his spokesman, Patrick Thronson: "The administration's executive order was designed to treat city employees equally regardless of marital status or sexual orientation. The council's plan sidesteps the issue of equality."

The mayor said the council's decision may mean 3rd District Judge Stephen Roth won't rule on whether Anderson's executive order is legal, depriving the state - even the country - of a precedent that backs domestic-partner benefits.

But Buhler predicted the council's vote will prove a "landmark" for other Utah cities.

Employee premiums will be higher under the council plan than under the mayor's. In an informal city survey, some employees have complained about the increase, saying they can't afford additional costs. Others said they would rather the city spend money on employee benefits and salaries.

The council expects to subsidize the plan by up to $225,000 at least once and could continue to help fund the program.

Another sticking point for some employees: The city won't cover married employees' adult designees because the employees' spouses and children already are eligible for city insurance.

hmay@sltrib.com

What's next:

l Veto? Mayor Rocky Anderson could veto the ordinance, but the council would very likely override him. The ordinance will take effect once it's published, probably within two weeks, although it will take longer for employees who qualify to receive the benefits.

l A lawsuit? The Utah Public Employees Health Program, which administers the city's insurance program, could go to court to ask whether the ordinance is legal. PEHP already is awaiting a ruling on the legality of Anderson's domestic-partner executive order.

l The Legislature? Rep. LaVar Christensen's HB 327 could trump the council's plan because the bill would forbid cities from subsidizing insurance for anyone other than employees' spouses or children.