Board directs external forensic audit of county contracts after heated debate

The Orange County Board of Supervisors voted 3–1 on Dec. 3 to direct the county’s internal audit department to solicit and hire an independent external audit firm to perform a forensic review of contracts established between January 2019 and August 2024. The board amended the motion on the floor to make the CEO office, Health Care Agency (HCA), OC Community Resources (OCCR) and the Social Services Agency (SSA) the first priority group.

Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento, who moved the item, said the goal is to ‘‘get an external, credible look’’ at a window of time that includes pandemic relief spending and other high‑risk funds. He told colleagues that a thorough external review could identify gaps in oversight and produce recommendations to strengthen county procurement and whistleblower protections.

Supervisor Katrina Foley, who seconded the motion, urged a workable timetable: ‘‘I want this done in a reasonable period of time so it’s not two or three years down the road,’’ Foley said, adding that ARPA and other COVID‑relief dollars should be included in the first pass. Foley asked staff to ensure the review would not interrupt ongoing internal audits that already were under way.

Vice Chair Doug Chaffee supported an independent review but encouraged a pragmatic approach that begins with high‑risk programs and asks an audit firm to propose a staged work plan. ‘‘Start with something manageable, get a report, and see how that’s going,’’ Chaffee said.

County Chief Executive Michelle Geary and County Counsel staff said the internal audit office will run the RFP process; internal audit was delegated authority to select the vendor without bringing firm selection back to the board. Director of Internal Audit (Mister Alonso) warned that a full forensic review across many contracts is resource intensive, estimating that the work could exceed $1 million and that the RFP/procurement process itself could take several months. Alonso said his department would create a contract inventory to better estimate scope and cost and would seek to provide phased public reporting of findings as the audit proceeds.

County Counsel cautioned that the county’s right to audit contractors depends on contract language; many county agreements already include audit and records‑preservation clauses, but legal limits may constrain retroactive reach. The board discussed but rejected a motion to narrow or delay the effort; a last‑minute amendment clarified this first‑phase focus on the four referenced agencies.

The motion as amended passed 3–1. The board directed internal audit to proceed with an RFP and to return public findings and recommendations when available. Supervisors asked for public transparency in reporting and for the internal audit office to prioritize high‑risk contracts in the initial phase.

What’s next: internal audit will compile the inventory, issue an RFP, evaluate proposals and select a firm; staff estimated the procurement could take four to five months and the forensic work could take many additional months depending on final scope. The board did not adopt a firm timetable but required public reporting of results and recommended phases if the vendor proposes them.