Orange County Supervisors Demand Longer Sentence for Andrew Do

Categories: Breaking NewsCrimeGovernment NewsHealthNews

A metaphorical representation of justice in the context of local governance

News Summary

In Orange County, Supervisors Janet Nguyen and Doug Chaffee are advocating for a stricter sentence for former supervisor Andrew Do, who faces a five-year limit following a bribery charge. They believe this reflects preferential treatment compared to others convicted of corruption. Do’s alleged misuse of COVID relief funds has sparked a push for accountability and a thorough investigation into his dealings, aiming to ensure fair justice for the community affected.

Orange County Supervisors Push for Tougher Sentence for Andrew Do

In a spirited move that is stirring up quite the conversation in Orange County, two local supervisors, namely Janet Nguyen and Doug Chaffee, are calling on federal prosecutors to impose a longer prison sentence for former supervisor Andrew Do. Their main concern? They believe the five-year cap in Do’s plea deal suggests he is receiving special treatment compared to others who have faced serious corruption charges.

The Case of Andrew Do

Andrew Do is scheduled to be sentenced on June 9 after admitting guilt to a felony bribery conspiracy charge back in late October. His plea deal is the result of an extensive federal investigation, which was spurred by months of digging into the mishandling of taxpayer dollars.

At the heart of the controversy is Do’s manipulation of millions in COVID relief funds, directing them to a nonprofit called the Viet America Society. This organization had strong ties to his family, with his daughter, Rhiannon Do, playing a significant role. Out of the whopping $9.3 million allocated for senior meal programs, only about $1.4 million was actually spent on meals for low-income seniors, raising eyebrows about how funds were utilized.

Calls for Fair Accountability

Nguyen and Chaffee are passionate about ensuring justice is served, arguing that the corruption charges against Do fall short of capturing the full magnitude of the harm caused to his community. They pointed out a notable comparison—former Lynwood Mayor Paul Richards was handed a hefty 16-year sentence for steering city contracts to a business he controlled. The disparity in sentencing between Richards and Do has raised serious questions about fairness in the justice system.

The supervisors are not stopping at just voicing their concerns; they are also proposing a formal letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to push for a thorough investigation into other individuals connected to the schemes with Do. Their aim is to prevent the feeling of “incomplete justice” and to ensure that all parties involved are held accountable.

Continuing Investigations

As the situation develops, the urgency of Nguyen and Chaffee’s proposal reflects widespread community demands for transparency and accountability concerning public funds. Do’s actions have notably impacted vulnerable communities relying on emergency aid during a time of crisis. Meanwhile, there are ongoing audits of contracts funded by federal COVID dollars to ensure compliance and proper oversight measures.

In an effort to prevent similar situations in the future, Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento is advocating for a forensic audit of contracts associated with Do to highlight any ongoing systemic issues within the county. Recent legislation has also been passed that requires county supervisors to publicly disclose any family ties when approving contracts, a direct response to Do’s controversial decisions.

A Judgement Still to Come

U.S. District Judge James Selna, who is overseeing Do’s sentencing, has made it clear that he intends to deliver a sentence based on what he perceives as appropriate, independent of the plea agreement’s terms. Meanwhile, Do’s attorney, Paul Meyer, has criticized the supervisors for what he calls a politically motivated attempt to sway the justice system.

As Orange County awaits the court’s decision, the influence of this case poses possibilities for significant changes in governance, with a community eager for ethical leadership and proper use of its funds. Whether or not the supervisors get their way in changing Do’s plea deal will undoubtedly be a pivotal moment in Orange County’s ongoing discussion about corruption, transparency, and community welfare.