DOMESTIC PARTNER BENEFITS DEBATED : BOARD OF EDUCATION POSTPONES VOTE TO STUDY EXTENDING COVERAGE.

Byline: Terri Hardy Daily News Staff Writer

Adding to national debate over same-sex marriages, the Los Angeles Board of Education agreed Monday to consider whether to extend health insurance to domestic partners of school employees.

By including same-sex partners of school employees, the Los Angeles Unified School District expects it would spend $3.5 million in the first year and $3.7 million the next.

A vote on the matter was delayed Monday because board members said they needed answers to such pressing questions as: How many domestic partners would the district expect to cover, and who would qualify as an employee's partner?

Critics of the proposal, including Parents and Students United of San Fernando Valley Inc., said the money could be better spent on education.

But board President Jeff Horton, the panel's first openly gay member, said the decision was ``a matter of equity'' for employees not in traditional relationships.

Board member Barbara Boudreaux said there were too many unanswered questions about how the benefits would be paid for and monitored.

``Our first priority is to the students we serve,'' Boudreaux said. ``It is not about being anti-anything; it is about being pro-student.''

If approved, domestic partner health benefits could begin Jan. 1, 1998.

Before Monday's board meeting, Parents and Students United staged a protest. Members of the group, active in a movement to split up the district, said they would rather have the money spent on students.

``How many pencils, books and air conditioners would $3.7 million buy for our children?'' asked Eadie Gieb, the group's president.

During the meeting, Gary Martinez, chairman of United Teachers Los Angeles' gay and lesbian issues committee, argued that the proposal was not about money.

``It is a matter of civil rights,'' he said. ``I can't get the person I love onto my benefits plan.''

Martinez sits on the district's Health and Welfare Benefits Committee, which recommended the extension of benefits.

Monday's board meeting marked the second time it decided to postpone a vote on the domestic partner issue. Last week, after a contentious meeting, board members called on the health and welfare committee to return Monday with answers to key questions about the proposal.

But Monday, committee members said they needed until March 31 to prepare their answers. At that point, the session exploded into finger pointing and recriminations.

Further, Boudreaux charged that UTLA ``bullies'' on the committee had steered others into endorsing the domestic partners proposal. She and other board members angrily ordered the committee to return with the requested information.

``Go back to the drawing board and really talk about it without any one union being a dominating factor,'' she said.

Board member Mark Slavkin said the committee has placed the district in the awkward position of appearing indecisive, ``like we are punting on what seems like a controversial issue.''

Horton charged the committee with ``stumbling.''

``I am sorry you took the path that you did,'' Horton said.

Committee Chairman Bill Callahan said district staff has been kept abreast of his group's work.

``I thought you were up to speed, but we were wrong,'' he told the board. ``All necessary information requested has been provided. It just didn't trickle up to the board.''

In delaying its vote Monday, the board also held up another part of the health benefits package, one that would provide coverage for surviving spouses and hearing aids and birth control to employees who needed them.

The board voted 5-1 in favor of considering the benefits package next month. Board member Vickie Castro voted against the motion, saying she had been ready to decide the matter Monday. Board member Julie Kornstein was absent.

Following the meeting, an irate Callahan called the board's vote irresponsiblMe because, he said, now employees won't get hearing aids and birth control until sometime after Jan. 1.