The Brief

Former Orange County Supervisor Andrew Do was ordered Monday to pay $878,230.80 in restitution for his involvement in a bribery scheme that saw millions in taxpayer dollars diverted from feeding needy seniors, leading authorities to label him a “Robin Hood in reverse.”

Federal prosecutors had asked the judge to order Do to pay back the roughly $878,000 amount, while Orange County was seeking the return of millions more. Kevin Dunn, an attorney for Orange County, had asked the judge for the higher amount "to restore the full measure of the damage to the county." The judge ultimately sided with prosecutors.

Do did not attend Monday's hearing. His attorney told the court Do was preparing to turn himself in by Friday to begin serving a five-year federal prison term.

Monday’s order brings the total taxpayer money expected to be recovered from the scheme to roughly $6 million. The roughly $878,000 in restitution from Do would be on top of an estimated $5 million in previously forfeited property and bank accounts. Ultimately, it will be up to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi whether the roughly $5 million in forfeited assets will actually go to Orange County or another recipient, authorities said.

By contrast, the restitution ordered today is expected to go directly to Orange County taxpayers. Orange County Supervisor Katrina Foley, who remarked “I'm not surprised he didn't show up,” said the money recovered will first be used to reimburse the county for out-of-pocket costs and then the rest will go into the county's General Fund.

Do has a net worth of $1.5 million, according to a June memo from the judge. "He has the ability to pay a fine," Selna wrote in the memo.

What happens next?

O.C. District Attorney Todd Spitzer said Do would be required to pay $250,000 of the total restitution amount within 30 days. He also told LAist that authorities are continuing to pursue the recovery of additional dollars from the scheme.

“We’re not done,” Spitzer said. “This does not prohibit us in any way from collecting restitution with respect to charged and potentially uncharged defendants."

"I have been committed to making the county as whole as possible from day one. That’s always been my goal," Spitzer added. "I didn’t anticipate it would all come from Andrew Do. There obviously are other people who are financial responsible.”

He added. “There’s a chapter that’s now closed. But we still have many more chapters to write.”

Elsewhere, the reaction to the ruling was immediate — and mostly reflected disappointment that the number wasn't higher to better reflect Do's misdeeds.

He admitted in his plea deal that about $8 million was diverted from feeding needy seniors. His plea deal does not cover an additional $3 million he directed to another nonprofit group, Hand to Hand Relief Organization, whose leader is now being prosecuted in connection with the meal money scheme.

What was the reaction to the judge's order?

Foley said she was "disappointed" as the county is still out around $10 million from the schemes.

Orange County Supervisor Janet Nguyen, who replaced Do on the Board of Supervisors, said "I’m disappointed in the judge’s ruling, however there is a process to obtain $5 million in funds seized from bank accounts and the sales of homes belonging to Andrew Do’s daughter and businesses associated with his scheme. We will work with the U.S. Attorney to obtain these funds to return to the residents he stole from."

Margaret Carrigan, a former employee of the O.C. Health Care Agency, was at the hearing on Monday and said the decision "diminishes my belief in the justice system. This defendant took advantage of poor people in a time of crisis and made decisions that benefited himself and his family, and he knew full well what he was doing, and it's hard for me to see people like that, that we trust and vote into office, that they can do that to their constituents."

Orange County Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento said he was not surprised by the ruling.

"The remainder of the funds, taken from vulnerable seniors during a crisis, needs to be returned. The county should continue to pursue every avenue to recover these funds from all parties involved in the former Supervisor’s scheme," he said in a written statement.

Why the county asked for millions more

Dunn, the county’s attorney, told the judge ahead of the sentencing that Do should have to pay the full $10 million-plus in contracts back to the county because it was foreseeable the money was being diverted from its intended target of feeding the needy.

Dunn said that as a sophisticated person — a former public defender, DA prosecutor, and a then-elected official — Do would have been aware that when he gave county dollars to a group that was then providing bribes to him, “it is then completely foreseeable that they may not be spending the rest of that money in a proper manner.”

He also pointed to Do’s admission in the plea deal that he kept awarding the money “in reckless disregard” for whether they were actually going to meals:

Dunn added that the victims in the case are “actually the hungry residents of Orange County who suffered.”

The judge ultimately did not agree to the county’s request for $10-plus million, instead siding with the federal prosecutors’ request for around $878,000 in restitution — an amount limited to the bribes Do admitted to taking through his daughters.

Where was Andrew Do?

The hearing on Monday was paused before it could get underway. Do was not in attendance, and the judge wanted to know why attorneys for Do hadn't filed a waiver from Do giving up his right to appear, as would be required for such hearings. Do's attorney's said he was preparing to turn himself in for his prison sentence. The judge then called a recess, adding that the hearing was not just a "mere technicality."

After almost an hour, proceedings resumed once the waiver was filed.

Carrigan, the former county employee, said Do's failure to show was disrespectful. " I don't believe that there was any reason that he shouldn't have been here."

Outside of court, Paul Meyer, Andrew Do's attorney, told LAist that the "the court's ruling says it all." He did not comment further.

What's the backstory

Do pleaded guilty last year to a federal bribery charge for accepting kickbacks from the over $10 million in federal COVID relief dollars he directed to a nonprofit, Viet America Society. Federal prosecutors said only around 15% of that money went where it was intended: to feed hungry seniors in need during the pandemic.

The criminal probe was launched in response to an LAist investigation of the money Do awarded the group, and the failure to account for it.

Do has been ordered to turn himself in to serve a five-year federal prison term by Friday.

Following the money

Ahead of Monday’s hearing, county officials filed a request seeking over $10 million in restitution. They based their request on the amounts Do directed to the nonprofit as supervisor.

“The county’s entitlement to restitution ... is not limited to the amount that [Do] personally gained through bribes but should be based on the county’s actual losses that was caused by [Do’s] criminal conduct,” an attorney for the county wrote in the request.

But federal prosecutors asked for a much lower amount — the nearly $900,000 in bribes they say Do received from the nonprofit through an elaborate scheme, which saw the kickbacks channeled through his daughters to cover the trail. And so they asked that restitution be set at $878,230.80 and said that there was not enough evidence to prove fraud beyond the bribes.

Do’s attorneys had their own request — they wanted the federal prosecutor’s amount to closer to $800,000 — discounted by the amount he said his daughter Rhiannon Do earned by working what he estimated to be 40 hours a week for a group connected to the nonprofit while she was in law school.

Supervisor Foley noted one grim upside to the scandal: "I'll be happy when we can kind of close this chapter in the county’s history book, we've learned a lot of lessons from this,” she said, adding “We have a lot more public corruption protections in place than we had prior, so that's a good thing for the taxpayers.”

Last week, Synergy Quantum Academy students joined regional walkouts protesting the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown. But with the South L.A. school’s tall metal gate shut, some opted to climb and jump over it.

The school’s leadership wrote in messages to parents and staff that an “unauthorized staff member” then opened that campus gate — in conflict with Los Angeles Unified School District protocol.

That staff member, teacher Ricardo Lopez, said he acted out of concern for the safety of students who might have hurt themselves trying to leave the school.

He said the school fired him the same day. Now his dismissal has spurred further protests and raised questions about whose responsibility it is to ensure safety as students exercise their First Amendment rights.

Here’s what we know 

Thousands of students across Los Angeles walked out during the first week of February to protest the Trump administration’s immigration policies, including students at Synergy Quantum Academy.

Lopez said that after the walkouts on Feb. 4, he heard several students talk about injuring themselves climbing over the metal fences that surround the South L.A. school.

On Thursday morning, during his academic prep period, Lopez said he saw students trying to climb over the metal gate on the north side of the campus.

“When I saw one of my [AP U.S. History] students climbing the fence and jumping…and like almost falling, I started rushing towards the gate,” Lopez said. “ I opened the gate for them so other students wouldn’t get hurt like the day before.”

Guidance from the ACLU of Southern California related to student walkouts states “locking exits to the school can pose serious health and safety concerns for students and staff.”

Lopez said he opened this gate on the north side of Synergy Quantum Academy and Maya Angelou Community High School's shared campus after watching students attempt to climb over Thursday Feb. 5.

(

Mariana Dale

/

LAist

)

Lopez said within an hour, Synergy’s human resources department informed him that he’d been terminated for insubordination. Lopez said there was no hearing or additional meeting where he was able to defend his actions.

“What hurts even more was that they escorted me out like I was a — I felt like a criminal,” Lopez said.

The contents of his classroom were later boxed and sent to him via a third-party delivery service.

Lopez said it’s still unclear to him why he was fired. He said staff received an email earlier in the week telling them not to participate in student protests, but there was no mention of any policy related to the gate.

“ I wasn't participating [in the protest],” Lopez said. “To me it was about protecting students from getting hurt.”

What has the school communicated? 

The school’s public justification for terminating Lopez intersects with a longstanding source of friction in Los Angeles schools — the co-location of independent charter schools on the campuses of traditional district schools.

Synergy Quantum Academy shares a campus with Los Angeles Unified's Maya Angelou Community High School. Synergy is an independent charter school with a separate staff overseen by a board of directors outside of the district.

In messages to parents and staff, Synergy's principal said opening the gate conflicted with LAUSD protocol.

Synergy Quantum Academy enrolled 564 students in the 2024-2025 school year and is one of several charter schools operated by Synergy Academies.

(

Mariana Dale

/

LAist

)

Synergy Academies CEO Rhonda Deomampo confirmed Lopez is no longer employed at the school.

In response to LAist's inquiry about which protocol was violated, Deomampo wrote in an email that Maya Angelou Community High School’s safety plan “clearly outlines the authority of the principal or designee in situations like these.” She also said “to date, the school has received no reports of student injuries related to student protests.”

The excerpt provided from the 206-page safety plan states it is the responsibility of the principal or designee to “maintain adequate safeguards to ensure the safety and welfare of students” during a walkout. The plan states “if students leave campus, school site administrators do not have a legal obligation to protect the safety and welfare of the students.” The document provided does not explicitly prohibit a staff member from opening a gate.

How is LAUSD involved? 

A Los Angeles Unified spokesperson said while independent charter schools are expected to follow district policies related to walkouts, the district does not weigh in on personnel decisions.

“Independent charter schools are responsible for the supervision and management of the charter school employees,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

Lopez said at Synergy, like many charter schools, he was an “at-will” employee, which means he can be terminated with or without cause and does not have the additional protections associated with union membership.

Community calls for teacher’s reinstatement

Lopez said he has a shared background with many of his students as the son of undocumented, working, immigrant parents who didn’t have an opportunity to pursue higher education themselves.

“That's one of the reasons I wanted to be a teacher because a lot of things that I learned [in college] really helped me grow,” Lopez said. Teaching was a way to pay forward that knowledge.

“ I really miss my students, you know, I miss being in the classroom,” Lopez said. “ I just want to be reinstated, you know, and just keep, keep doing what I'm doing, teaching and supporting my students and protecting my students.”

Lopez said he is also worried that the termination could jeopardize his teaching credential or ability to get future jobs as an educator.

On Tuesday, dozens of students from both Maya and Synergy joined with organizers from Unión del Barrio and the Association of Raza Educators to rally for Lopez’s reinstatement.

Ayleen was a junior in Lopez's AP U.S. History class. “ When he sees that a student's not OK, he asks them personally and he doesn't embarrass them in front of everybody," she said.

(

Mariana Dale

/

LAist

)

Synergy junior Ayleen said she didn’t participate in Wednesday’s walkout, but heard about peers who’d jumped the fence and gotten hurt. Ayleen requested to be identified only by her first name to protect her privacy.

“We truly believe that he shouldn't have been fired for protecting a student,” she said. “That's his number one priority as a teacher, protecting his students, and he's the only one that upheld that that day.”

Lopez was Ayleen’s AP U.S. History teacher. AP classes culminate in a rigorous test where students can earn college credit.

“He has this way of teaching that he helps so much because he re-words questions,” Ayleen said. “It sounds simple, but so many teachers don't do that. He genuinely helps us to learn.”

Ayleen’s mother, Mary, said she supported her daughter’s decision to join the Friday walkout in protest of Lopez’s termination and would like the school to bring him back.

According to an Instagram post, students from Maya and Synergy plan to participate in another walkout Friday — still against ICE, but now also in support of their former teacher.

The National Park Service is asking for public input for its study on whether the L.A. coastline between San Pedro and Santa Monica should qualify for national park designation.

Federal officials held a public meeting Wednesday and outlined the study process.

Congress passed a law in 2022 that called for this study and greenlit funding for the three-year effort.

Lawmakers will use the findings to decide whether to designate the stretch of coastline — which includes the Santa Monica Pier, Ballona Creek and RAT Beach — a national park.

Sarah Bodo, project manager at NPS, said the coastline is interpreted as part of the sea to approximately 200 yards inland.

“The 200-yard number is an effort to include the beach areas and the public lands, while excluding private property from the study area,” Bodo said. “In cases where private property is within 200 yards, those properties are excluded from the study.”

What are the criteria?

To become a national park, the area needs to contain nationally significant resources, not already be in the national park system and require direct NPS management.

Sequoia National Park, for example, was recognized in 1890 to protect the giant trees from logging.

Officials will also consider where the access, cost and size of the area can be managed by the department.

The National Park Service is studying whether the red portions of the L.A. coastline should qualify for national park designation.

(

Courtesy of the National Park Service

)

“A study area must meet all four of the criteria,” Bodo said.

What happens now?

The agency is early in the study process. If you have thoughts on the matter, now is the time to share them.

The public comment period is open until April 6.

In the coming months, the agency will review that feedback before preparing a study report for Congress.

Only Congress and the president have the ability to designate a new national park.

“At that point, it will be up to Congress or the president to take action or not. There is no timeline for further action from Congress or the president,” Bodo said. “The completion of the study does not establish a new park unit.”

The process could take years. The last designation given to Missouri’s Ste. Genevieve National Historic Park in 2018, according to the Associated Press. Congress ordered the study for that park in 2005.

Outstanding questions

One question raised at Wednesday’s meeting was what the benefits and downsides of having NPS manage this area are.

Bodo said that would depend on what the legislation would say if designated and how management would work.

“The National Park Service is required to conserve unimpaired scenery, natural and historic objects, wildlife of parks, and to provide for their enjoyment by the public. That's our overall mission,” Bodo said. “National parks can also generate economic activity in nearby communities.”

And, if designated, how exactly would management of this area work?

It’s also still too early to say, but existing property owners, like the county or city, could continue to own and manage the property, Bodo added.

“If this were to be designated, there maybe wouldn't be significant changes in that arena,” Bodo said. “The Park Service would seek to work collaboratively with local communities and existing agencies on common goals for resource protection and recreational opportunities.”

Another question asked was how might Park Service involvement along the L.A. coast affect fishing and hunting regulations?

“That's really dependent on land ownership, so if land ownership did not change, nothing would change,” Bodo said.

How you can participate

The National Park Service is looking for public input. A second virtual meeting will be held March 11 at 6 p.m. You can join here.

Public comments are also being accepted online here.

Want more Olympics updates? Subscribe here to get our newsletter, Rachel Goes to the Games, delivered to your inbox for a behind-the-scenes look at the 2026 Milan Cortina Winter Olympics.

MILAN — U.S. snowboarder Chloe Kim's quest for a historic Olympic halfpipe three-peat was foiled by none other than her teenage protégé.

Kim took home silver, after 17-year-old Gaon Choi of South Korea rebounded from a dramatic crash to overtake her in the final run.

"It's the kind of story you only see in dreams, so I'm incredibly happy it happened today," Choi said afterward.

Kim, 25, was within arm's reach of becoming the first halfpipe snowboarder to win three consecutive Olympic golds. Despite a last-minute shoulder injury, she cruised easily through Wednesday's qualifiers, which were actually her first competition of the season.

And she was looking like a lock through much of Thursday's final — under a light nighttime snowfall in Livigno — which hinged on the best of three runs.

Kim's strong first showing gave her 88 points and an early lead, which she held for the majority of the competition as many other contenders — including her U.S. teammates Bea Kim and Maddy Mastro — fell on one or more of their runs.

A big crash nearly ended Choi's night early, but after a medical exam she returned to the halfpipe slope for two more runs.

(

Gregory Bull

/

AP

)

Choi also took a heavy fall on her opening run, needing a concussion check. She almost missed her second turn, only to fall again. But an impressive third run propelled her to the top of the leaderboard, with 90.25 points.

"It wasn't so much about having huge resolve," she said later. "I just kept thinking about the technique I was originally doing."

Then all eyes were on Kim, the last rider of the night, with a chance to retake the lead. But she fell on her cab double cork 1080, a trick she had landed cleanly in previous runs, which stuck her with her original score. Choi and her team broke down in happy sobs and cheers immediately.

As Choi wiped her eyes, a beaming Kim greeted her at the photo finish with a warm hug. As they lined up alongside bronze medalist Mitsuki Ono of Japan, Kim stood to Choi's side and pointed at her excitedly.

"I've known [Choi] since she was little, and it means a lot to see that I've inspired the next generation and they're now out here killing it," Kim said afterward.

Choi is the same age Kim was in 2018 when she became the youngest woman to win an Olympic snowboard medal.

The two have known each other for nearly a decade, a bond that began when Choi's father struck up a friendship with Kim's dad — who emigrated from South Korea to the U.S. — in the lead-up to the 2018 Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang.

Kim (R) gave Choi (L) a warm reception after the last run of the night.

(

Patrick Smith

/

Getty Images

)

"Chloe's dad did a lot of mentoring to my dad," Choi said after winning the first World Cup she entered in 2023, at age 14. "I didn't know much because I was young, but Chloe's dad gave my dad a lot of advice. It made me who I am today."

Kim and her dad helped bring Choi to the U.S. to train with at California's Mammoth Mountain, and maintained a supportive relationship. Kim spoke highly of Choi at an earlier press conference, calling it a "full-circle moment" and saying she sees "a mirror reflection of myself and my family."

"We're seeing a big shift to Asians being dominant in snow sports," she added. "I've had aunts telling me that I shouldn't snowboard, get a real career, focus on school. It's cool to see that shift happening."

Choi's victory makes her the first female Korean athlete to win a medal in snow sports. This is also South Korea's first snowboard gold.

"I want to introduce this sport more to my country through my performance at this Olympics," Choi told Olympics.com before the Games. "I also believe that enjoying the Games is just as important as achieving good results."
Copyright 2026 NPR

A federal judge this week ruled against the city of Los Angeles in a long-running lawsuit over the city’s practice of destroying unhoused people’s property during encampment sweeps.

In a rare default judgment, U.S. District Judge Dale S. Fischer made a finding in favor of the plaintiffs — ending the case — because the city destroyed, fabricated or altered documents relevant to the case.

The judge found the city had acted "willfully and in bad faith" to deprive the plaintiffs of the information they requested repeatedly, and that the city's explanation for its misconduct was "not credible," according to court documents.

It’s a win for six unhoused residents and advocacy organization Ktown For All, who filed the lawsuit in 2019, challenging whether L.A. Sanitation employees violated unhoused residents’ constitutional rights when seizing and discarding belongings during sweeps.

L.A. city code allows employees to remove and impound unattended, abandoned or hazardous items that are in the public right-of-way. In the lawsuit, plaintiffs alleged city sanitation workers arbitrarily seize and destroy property without objective standards or proper notice. With the default judgement, the court accepted those allegations as true.

City’s misconduct 

According to the judge's ruling, attorneys for Ktown For All argued that the city had "altered and fabricated key evidence" — including health hazard assessment reports and checklists —- after the lawsuit was filed. Their arguments were supported in 2023, after a forensic examiner reviewed some of the evidence and the court found the city had "altered, modified, and created documents" relevant to the case.

The city of L.A. admitted to destroying some documents, but argued it did so because the records were error-filled because of flawed record-keeping during the pandemic, not an “intent to deprive Plaintiffs of the information’s use in the litigation,” according to the ruling.

Fischer noted there were problematic documents associated with more than 90% of the 144 cleanup cases examined by the court. Those records were being used to justify the city’s legal defenses for seizing unhoused residents’ belongings.

The judge also affirmed that city employees rewrote some reports to change the reason for seizures, including adding details about “biohazards” and describing property as “surrendered” or “dangerous.”

According to the ruling, the L.A. City Attorney’s Office hid the misconduct from the court and violated multiple court orders over five years.

“The court cannot proceed to trial with confidence that plaintiffs have had access to the true facts,” Fischer wrote.

“Where a party so damages the integrity of the discovery process that there can never be assurance of proceeding on the true facts, a case-dispositive sanction may be appropriate,” the judge continued, quoting another legal ruling.

Reaction from the attorneys

Shayla Myers with the Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said the city’s fabrication and alteration of documents made a fair trial impossible.

“The fabrication of cleanup reports in this case is itself an indictment of the city's practices,” Myers said. “At these sweeps, the city provides unhoused people absolutely no recourse.”

L.A. city officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the court’s decision.

What’s next?

The plaintiffs are seeking damages and a permanent injunction blocking the city from seizing and discarding personal property during encampment cleanups. They have until March 27 to file a brief in support of a proposed permanent injunction.