Supervisors and residents press for accountability as probes into pandemic-era grants surface

Orange County supervisors and dozens of public commenters used the Board of Supervisors’ Aug. 27 meeting to press for accountability after federal and state activity tied to pandemic-era grant spending was disclosed.

Supervisor Katrina Foley called on Supervisor Andrew Doe to step down, saying his continued presence on the board is "untenable" and urging resignation so the board can begin rebuilding public trust. "Andrew, please resign," Foley said during board comments, adding that resignation "is not an admission of guilt" but would allow the county to move forward while due process proceeds.

Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento, who spoke during board comments, said the county is confronting "an unsettling" moment after investigations and search-warrant activity involving pandemic relief funds and county vendors. He urged stronger transparency and said the board should consider a formal censure motion. "These are millions of dollars that were received by the county from the federal government and were intended for the benefit of vulnerable seniors," Sarmiento said, stressing the need for scrutiny and possible further oversight.

Members of the public made repeated allegations about misuse of discretionary and grant funds, and several asked for audits of local nonprofits that received federal or county grants. One public commenter, Jackie Cordova, said she had filed a formal complaint and called for officials to be held responsible; another speaker urged the board to stop discretionary funding until audits were completed.

Chair Wagner and other supervisors noted that federal and state prosecutors and the IRS have been involved in inquiries and that some of the matters predate current board membership and arose during the pandemic response. Supervisors emphasized the importance of due process, but several said that continued uncertainty has eroded public trust and that the board needs to act to restore confidence.

The board did not take formal disciplinary action that day; members discussed administrative options and scheduled related agenda items and meetings for early September to consider changes to board appointments and other responses. Several supervisors said they will pursue legal and procedural avenues, including a possible censure, and pledged to cooperate with investigators and with internal audits.

The meeting record shows sustained public interest and sharply divided views in the audience; a number of speakers repeated claims about election administration and other grievances that board members directed to other channels for investigation.

Next steps: supervisors said they expect further administrative actions and a return to the issue on the Sept. 10 board agenda.