Orange County probe of Andrew Do scandal comes too late

The Orange County Board of Supervisors is considering hiring outside investigators to launch an investigation into the scandal surrounding Andrew Do, who resigned as a supervisor last month and then pleaded guilty to a federal felony charge of conspiracy to commit bribery.

We’re fine with that approach given that something went very wrong with the county’s oversight capabilities. Do pleaded guilty to “accepting more than $550,000 in bribes for directing and voting in favor of more than $10 million in COVID funds to a charity affiliated with one of his daughters, Rhiannon Do,” per the U.S. Department of Justice.

However, this wasn’t a particularly complex scheme that required forensic accountants. It was a fairly basic one. Supervisors have the authority to divert discretionary dollars to charities of their own choosing in their district. Typically, they each receive around $200,000 a year to parcel out without the usual vetting. They usually fund traditional charities, police programs or park projects.

During COVID-19, supervisors suddenly had a trove of federal funds at their discretion. According to prosecutors, Do sent millions to Viet America Society to provide­­ meals to elderly and disabled residents in Little Saigon. He never disclosed his daughter’s involvement with the group. That wasn’t illegal, but was a warning sign. Then the charity failed to meet its required audit deadlines, ultimately prompting a county lawsuit.

In its review of public records, the VoiceofOC found that county staff saw red flags as early as 2022. “Supervisor Katrina Foley said supervisors weren’t informed about staff’s concerns until much later, and is calling for a new system that would alert supervisors when contractors are out of compliance,” according to the publication’s August report.

This Editorial Board expressed frustration at supervisors’ inaction as LAist broke news of the unfolding scandal. We called on Do to resign his seat in November 2023, so it’s not as if there weren’t warning signs. So by all means bring in outside investigators – but the real question is why insiders including board members refused to employ the investigatory powers they already hold.