Will Street get off the dime and step down?

Chriss Street has a problem that everybody understands but him. He’s the Orange County treasurer, who oversees an investment portfolio of $7 billion, and he’s the subject of investigations by federal and local authorities involving financial matters.

Hello?

This isn’t about a rush to judgment or tainted reputation. Street, elected last year, isn’t guilty of anything so far. He hasn’t even been charged with anything.

Nobody’s rushing or tainting.

But there’s a much less forgiving standard in play. It’s the standard of public perception, and when it comes to managing the investments of cities and school districts, among other entities, the benefit of the doubt doesn’t apply.

For a county that already has gone bankrupt in one lifetime, there can’t be the slightest whiff of uncertainty over the man or woman at the top of the investment pile. The county treasurer’s job isn’t the kind where you let the guy hang in there while investigations involving financial matters poke along.

Rather, it’s the kind of job where the office holder should say, “I’ve done nothing wrong, but because the issue goes to the integrity of the office, I’m going to step down until they’re resolved. I’ll be back.”

That shouldn’t be a complicated decision to make. However, Street doesn’t see it that way, and affirmed Monday his unwillingness to step aside, even temporarily, while the U.S. attorney’s office and the U.S. Labor Department probe details of Street’s actions when serving as a trustee in a bankruptcy case, and the Orange County district attorney’s office investigates his involvement, while treasurer, in a county contract.

That’s about three probes too many for my tastes. Likewise for Supervisor John Moorlach, who last week joined the county employees union in calling for Street’s resignation. Moorlach’s request was particularly compelling because, while treasurer, he appointed Street as his assistant.

Moorlach also has unofficial treasurer emeritus status because, even when the county appeared to be flush in the early 1990s, he warned about the investment practices of Robert Citron that eventually led to the 1994 bankruptcy.

Street no doubt senses that stepping aside would be tantamount to admitting wrongdoing.

Or that he’d be abdicating his duties as an elected official. Would someone please tell him that neither would be the case?

In a weird irony, he’d actually be showing more respect for the office by putting himself on ice for a while.

By holding his ground, Street is, in effect, saying, “Trust me.”

Buddy, we’d love to. But even if you’re right, you’re wrong.

Wrong, because we’ve heard that refrain from public officials time and again, only to find out that, guess what, the investigations did turn up something.

I’m not suggesting for a second that I have any idea what the investigations will turn up. For all I know, they could all represent prosecutorial misadventure.

I’m just saying the public has no obligation to sit and wait.

Is that fair to Street? Probably not.

Could he still do his job while under investigation? Quite possibly; Bill Clinton ran the country under those conditions.

But being in charge of billions of dollars while questions of financial mismanagement swirl makes this a no-brainer. It’d be like discovering your personal financial advisor was being investigated by authorities. You’d move your money under the mattress first and ask questions later.

The Orange County supervisors may try something like that. They’re considering what, if any, action to take to curb Street’s involvement in investment decisions while he’s under a cloud.

They owe investors no less.

If Street were the dogcatcher, yeah, we could string him along, let this play out.

But treasurer? When the investigations involve finances?

No way.

C’mon, man, wake up and smell the perception.

Dana Parsons’ column appears Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. He can be reached at (714) 966-7821 or at dana.parsons@latimes.com. An archive of his recent columns is at www.latimes.com/parsons