PUBLISHED 7/11/08 ----

We’re supposed to be able to trust the county’s elected auditor-controller to make decisions based on fiscal responsibility. Budgetary concerns, exclusive of all other matters, define that job.

Are taxpayers getting their money’s worth from local government? Is the county taxing fairly and spending judiciously? Is government operating free of fraud?

Those are among the questions Kern County Auditor-Controller Ann Barnett was elected to answer honestly and competently.

But Barnett’s credibility is now on the line. She justified her recent decision to end a high-demand service her department provided for years — performing civil marriage ceremonies — on her contention it was too costly; that it was a big money-loser for county taxpayers.

Her decision was made in the wake of a California Supreme Court ruling that cleared the way for same-sex marriages in the state and required county officials, such as Barnett, to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Although opposed to same-sex marriages, Barnett complied with the ruling and her department began issuing licenses last month. But she ordered her staff to stop performing all civil marriage ceremonies.

Rather than own up to her real motivation — that the decision was based on ideology, personal beliefs and individual predilection — she conjured up financial “facts” that defy logic and common sense.

She listened to advice from people, including attorneys from the socially conservative Alliance Defense Fund, who do not share her obligation to constituents. She tuned out those who do, including  the county counsel.

The result: Her ability to do simple math, the single most relevant competency of the office, is now in doubt.

In announcing her decision to halt civil marriage ceremonies, Barnett claimed the move would save Kern County taxpayers about $18,000 a year. She contended the county lost almost $9 on every $30 wedding.

But the county’s top administrator disputes Barnett’s math. The  savings to taxpayers is more like $171 a year, County Administrative Officer Ron Errea recently told the Board of Supervisors.

Errea notes that Barnett erroneously added administrative costs to the total bill. As Errea pointed out, Barnett’s department will continue paying the staff that performs those duties, whether or not the ceremonies continue.

Since marriage ceremonies bring in approximately $63,000 annually, Errea says, the actual savings is $171. Raising the marriage fee $10 to $40 — which is still much less than many other California counties charge — would presumably make the service a clear-cut money-maker.

But Barnett’s office insists other concerns — such as security and providing space for the ceremonies — outweigh any likely monetary gain. Barnett declines to explain those concerns, however.

Set aside the philosophical or religious motivation for Barnett’s decision to stop performing civil marriage ceremonies. You may even agree that Barnett was right — or righteous — to take that action.

But be concerned when a county official we elect to be the fiscal watchdog for all county government offices uses tortured logic and flawed math to justify a decision.

If she can’t be believed when it comes to the actions of her department, can we believe her findings when it comes to other county departments and programs?