Orange County Supervisors may soon discuss publicly whether to grant themselves subpoena power to investigate corruption within county administration. This consideration comes amid growing frustration inside the county Hall of Administration following public audits detailing the 2024 Andrew Do scandal.
The scandal centered on the former supervisor steering COVID relief contracts to his family, connected vendors, and ultimately himself in a bribery scheme, which led to a five-year prison sentence. The most recent audit report was described as scathing, highlighting clear problems with how various county executives, including former Health Care Agency Director Dr. Clayton Chou, managed public contracts and vendors during the pandemic.
Supervisors Janet Nguyen, a Republican, and Vicente Sarmiento, a Democrat, have been publicly asking hard questions during recent public meetings. Both supervisors express frustration that there has not been more accountability or additional investigations beyond Andrew Do. Supervisor Nguyen, who joined the board after the November 2024 election and was a state senator when the Do scandal broke, stated that the County has been investigating Do for two years, and it still feels like there is much to learn. She expressed a desire for action, saying, “taxpayers deserve action” and doesn't want the process to keep “dragging out for a decade.”
Supervisor Nguyen’s push for further investigation, including granting the board subpoena power, is supported by past reporting that detailed the risks supervisors ran by not launching their own investigations years ago. Instead, supervisors at the time opted for audits, which have taken years to complete but have since revealed questionable contract oversight and identified a series of bad actors.
Ironically, a different bipartisan coalition years back – Republican Don Wagner and Democrat Katrina Foley – resisted calls for more county-led investigations into the Do scandal. They preferred to rely on federal prosecutors and county lawsuits for discovery and accountability. Wagner characterized the Do scandal as the product of a corrupt politician and cautioned against overreaction from a single scandal. Foley stated at the time that launching an investigation could complicate the county’s ongoing lawsuits, which she believed would serve as the best tool for discovery.
However, federal officials do not appear to be pursuing investigations beyond Do's prosecution, and little public information is available regarding the progress of the county’s lawsuits against Do and others. In contrast, the City of Anaheim contracted with the JL Group for an investigative review of its city hall following its own scandal and produced a public report within a year.
Now, following scathing audits from the Weaver Group detailing the county's contracting culture, Supervisor Nguyen appears to have an ally in Supervisor Sarmiento, who has consistently advocated for a more robust investigation. Sarmiento affirmed that the audit findings have demonstrated the value of independent review in identifying weaknesses and bringing potential misconduct to light, stating, “Now it is our responsibility to act.” He shares Supervisor Nguyen’s frustration regarding the failure to pursue every avenue to recover taxpayer dollars from entities and individuals identified in the most recent audit findings.
Nguyen is calling on the District Attorney to seriously examine these cases, noting that what these individuals did appears to be criminal and should result in prosecutions. She has offered her assistance, including drafting subpoenas for bank records, and has asked County Counsel to explore granting the Board this specific power. Sarmiento supports the Board pursuing all available avenues, including referrals to law enforcement, independent investigations, and civil actions, to recover improperly obtained public funds and ensure taxpayers are made whole. The growing frustration could soon lead to change, with the discussion of subpoena powers increasingly on the supervisors' agenda.
