A majority of Orange County Supervisors asked for a federal judge to force disgraced former Supervisor Andrew Do to repay over $10 million he helped redirect to a nonprofit connected to his daughter.

Do currently faces up to five years in prison.

Supervisors voted 3-1-1 to send a letter to the U.S. District judge, calling for Do to face at least five years in prison, repay the money the county lost as a result of his schemes and to at a special meeting on Tuesday. 

But throughout Tuesday’s debate, supervisors butted heads on how or even if they should ask for Do to face a harsher sentence than the one on the table.

Under Do’s plea agreement, he faces a maximum of five years in prison, a sentence almost every county supervisor said fell too short for his crimes. 

“Everybody here agrees he’s already receiving leniency,” said Supervisor Janet Nguyen at Tuesday’s special meeting. “He should receive more.” 

The special meeting marks the second time supervisors debated this month over whether to ask a federal judge to stiffen Do’s sentence.

[Read: Former OC Supervisor Andrew Do Pleads Guilty to Bribery Scheme]

On Tuesday, supervisors again argued over just how much time he should serve and what charges he should face – or if it was their place to tell a federal judge how to do his job.

Nguyen said they should list other possible charges for Do, saying that he should get the full five years if he’s not going to be charged with other crimes. 

“We can use it as a basis for saying five years is still too little,” Nguyen said. “This case has united people across the political spectrum who just want to see justice.” 

According to his plea agreement, Do siphoned millions of dollars meant to feed the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic, instead using the money to pay property taxes on his home and financially support his daughter. 

Supervisor Don Wagner, the sole vote against the letter, was the most outspoken opponent of calling for additional charges, saying it wasn’t their place to tell prosecutors or a judge what consequences Do should face. 

He was also the sole vote last week opposing supervisors’ letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi calling for Do’s plea agreement to be revised, which was also included as an attachment in their letter to the judge. 

[Read: Orange County Supervisors Ask Prosecutors to Crack Down Harder on Disgraced Former Colleague]

“There is no place in our system of justice for a political body to send in a statement,” Wagner said. “That approach is as wrong today as it was last week to try to exercise political influence.”

Nguyen and Supervisors Katrina Foley and Vicente Sarmiento argued they weren’t telling the judge how to do his job, but speaking up as victims and the ongoing impacts. 

Foley highlighted how Do’s crimes continue to be a problem for the county, highlighting the over $800,000 in legal fees already spent across their civil lawsuit trying to get their money back. 

“We can put whatever we want in a victim impact statement,” Foley said. “I don’t think it hurts to include a sentence that says we think that the full penalty, the five years max, should be considered because these are the charges that could’ve been brought.”

Sarmiento said he wanted to show “deference,” to Nguyen’s wishes since the money Do diverted was for her district, and noted that the judge should be pushing for Do to get a harsher sentence. 

“The court should be exercising its decision making authority to go at the upper end of that range,” Sarmiento said. “We lived through a year of pain.” 

Supervisor Doug Chaffee ultimately abstained from voting, saying he felt the letter to the judge would hurt their case. 

“I want the maximum sentence,” Chaffee said to close out the meeting. “I think this detracts from that opportunity.” 

Noah Biesiada is a Voice of OC reporter and corps member with Report for America, a GroundTruth initiative. Contact him at nbiesiada@voiceofoc.org.