The Scandal of Andrew Do: Bribery, Breach, and its Implications for Orange County
In a shocking turn of events following Andrew Do’s resignation from the Orange County Board of Supervisors, a federal bribery scandal has revealed major breaches of confidentiality within the county’s operations. Do, who pleaded guilty to accepting over $550,000 in bribes, continued to receive confidential communications between the Board and its lead attorney for months after his departure from office. This breach raises critical questions about governance, oversight, and systemic vulnerabilities within the county’s management, highlighting the urgent need for reform.
On February 20, Eliot Krieger, Do’s civil lawyer, formally reported this breach to County Counsel Leon Page, in accordance with state regulations. A forensic analysis conducted by Krieger uncovered 57 emails sent from Page’s official government email to Do’s personal address, starting from the day Do resigned on October 22, 2024, up until February 21, 2025. Krieger emphasized that he remains unaware of the email content but noted that Do first became aware of these emails when he was added to an ongoing lawsuit against a nonprofit organization that misappropriated $10 million in pandemic relief funds. This nonprofit, the Viet America Society, is connected to Do’s bribery case, posing critical implications for the integrity of the ongoing investigations.
County Supervisor Katrina Foley expressed her outrage concerning the breach, voicing concern that Do may have accessed sensitive information related to litigation strategies and ongoing criminal investigations. Such insights, particularly concerning an individual with a history of ethical violations, illuminate the potential for further misconduct. Foley remarked, "It shows the depths of the criminal mindset of the person that was running the county for all these years." Despite the insights that Do may have obtained through these misdirected communications, the facts remain clear: he has pleaded guilty and faces significant legal ramifications.
The circumstances surrounding how this breach took place have raised eyebrows. Foley indicated that the emails were still being forwarded to Do’s personal Gmail account, a vestige from his time in office, even after he left, as Do’s official email access was blocked after his resignation. While it remains uncertain whether Do actively monitored these emails, Krieger asserted that the forwarding was an automatic function and noted that Do lacked control over who was included in the distribution lists maintained by the County Counsel. District Attorney Todd Spitzer characterized the situation as a "bad practice" and commended Krieger for alerting the county to this flaw in the system.
Additionally, it has come to light that Do was involved in directing a substantial share of COVID relief funds to Viet America Society, which he failed to disclose had ties to his family. Out of the allocated $9.3 million, only $1.4 million was spent on meals for the elderly and people with disabilities, and much of the funding was mysteriously diverted to purchase properties associated with his daughter, Rhiannon Do. This revelation has not only tarnished Do’s reputation but has also prompted calls for comprehensive audits and an overhaul of ethical guidelines among county supervisors.
The implications of this scandal extend far beyond Do’s resignation and guilty plea, reflecting an urgent need for reform in Orange County’s governance. As Do faces a potential five-year sentence in federal prison, the community grapples with the fallout of his actions and the systemic failures that allowed such breaches to occur. This incident sheds light on governance practices that require urgent attention and evaluation.
In conclusion, the ongoing fallout from Andrew Do’s bribery case and the resulting breach of confidential communications reveal glaring deficiencies within the Orange County Board of Supervisors’ administrative procedures. This saga raises essential questions regarding accountability, oversight, and the need for more stringent ethical guidelines to prevent future misconduct. As the community seeks to restore trust in its local government, the necessity for comprehensive reforms becomes increasingly evident.
