Gay Couple Suing to Get Golf Club Membership Rights

B. Koebke thought her $700-a-month membership at private Bernardo Heights Country Club in northern San Diego County allowed her to add her longtime gay partner as a spousal member.

She thought wrong.

Koebke was told her membership policy did not allow her to designate partner Kendall French as a spouse. Bernardo Heights’ board has not budged on the interpretation, restricting French to the six rounds granted each year to guests.

Koebke and French, gay partners for 10 years, can’t marry, but they have registered as domestic partners in San Diego and California and own a home and two cars together. They sued the club, arguing Koebke’s hefty dues should entitle French to full-time playing privileges that other members’ spouses receive.

“Our club never asks others for a marriage license or for their children’s birth certificates, but with us, it gets complicated,” Koebke said. “Basically, they don’t want gays.”

The suit was dismissed last June, with a Superior Court judge ruling the club treated Koebke, 46, and French, 40, the same as other unmarried couples. But new attorneys, contending Bernardo Heights’ stance is a violation of the state’s Unruh Civil Rights Act that mandates equal rights in public businesses, filed an appeal in October. Bernardo Heights accepts public money when it hosts events, such as wedding receptions.

Marcia Chambers, who wrote of Koebke and French in the magazine “Golf for Women” and also wrote a book about women’s country club rights, “The Unplayable Lie,” contends that the case “may become the landmark case that once and for all defines the rights of gay couples at California country clubs. Its impact may extend nationwide.”

Said Koebke, “Kendall and I just wanted free guest passes. All we wanted to do was play golf together. The club has made this so ridiculous with its blatant message: ‘You’re gay, we don’t want you.’ ”

“We’re not good enough to be a family?” Koebke asked.

Tom Monson, an attorney and former Bernardo Heights board member who defended the club in the suit, said the restriction against French is simply a matter of adhering to club bylaws, which provide for membership privileges to “the member’s legal spouse.”

Asked if French would be considered a legal spouse if state or county law were altered to allow for such a designation, Monson said, “As far as I know, the bylaws would have no problem with that.”

John Shiner, a Los Angeles attorney representing the club in the appeal, said the plaintiffs’ opening brief is due in the state court of appeal in San Diego on April 21.

Said French: “If everyone were to acquiesce to what is wrong, where are you going to be? I wouldn’t welcome this fight upon anybody, but on the same token it feels good to stand up for what you believe in.”