Leonard Goldman should resign.

That's a harsh judgment about the man who built the ISU Research Park into a grand success.

And it's rendered with sadness.

But Leonard Goldman has become an embarrassment to Iowa State University and Ames. His successes have been overshadowed by a series of alarming lawsuits alleging harassment of women employees, discrimination against them, and general obnoxious behavior - screaming and swearing and telling sexual jokes - in front of them.

Nothing has been proven. Three of the lawsuits were settled this summer, and a settlement is certainly no admission of guilt. Indeed, as lawyers are quick to point out, even people who file frivolous lawsuits are sometimes paid settlements just to avoid the expense of the litigation.

So Leonard Goldman has been found guilty of nothing.

If that were the end of it, we would hold our tongue.

But there's more.

There's a particularly damning document in the file. It's a letter from Gordon E. Allen, Iowa's deputy attorney general, and Craig Kelinson, a special assistant attorney general, to the Iowa Department of Management asking the state to draw a check for $157,700 as its share of the settlement of the three suits.

"...although Iowa State University and the individual defendants have denied all liability, it is my [sic] belief that a jury would have awarded some damages to one or all of these plaintiffs after a prolonged trial," the two men wrote. "The defendants would then be obligated to pay plaintiff's attorneys fees for pretrial and trial proceedings. The amount of the settlement negotiated is in my view substantially less than those damages and attorneys fees which would be awarded by a jury."

In other words, the lawyers for the state and the university and most of the individual defendants - but not for the Research Park or Goldman himself - thought a jury would find Goldman discriminated against the women or harassed them. They thought giving these women and their lawyer $157,700 of state money was the prudent course.

That's strong - and expensive - stuff. What's more, it can be argued that Goldman's behavior - whatever it was - has cost taxpayers even more than $157,700.

The Research Park, which has been subsidized by city taxpayers and which has close links to the state-subsidized university, also settled. A clause in that settlement bars both sides from disclosing the terms, but it probably was for quite a bit less than $157,700. Plaintiffs and their lawyers like round numbers, so one guess - and there's nothing to base this on - might be $42,300, which would put the total at $200,000.

Whatever the amount, it has come out of the operating funds of the Research Park, funds that could have been used to reduce the subsidy from the city. Will it have an impact on the park, which always seems to be wanting things from the city? "I'm not free to comment" on that or anything else, Goldman said last week. He did say the payment would show up in the Park's annual audit, which, he quickly added, "is not a matter of public record."

All this secrecy adds to our uneasiness. Is Goldman himself required to make a payment out of his $100,000-a-year salary? Who asked that the settlement with Goldman and the Park be kept quiet? No one will say - the nondisclosure agreement bars even that - but it's a safe bet that neither the three women nor their lawyers demanded that the settlement be secret.

Is there even more to this sorry episode?

What is it that the Research Park and Goldman want to hide?

The board of the Research Park approved the settlement, and John Shors, the Des Moines lawyer who is counsel to the Park and whose firm represented it, says "I don't think there were any dissenting votes." That seems odd. Someone on that board - some of the Ames business people or Iowa State officials or successful alums - should have asked that the air be cleared, that the taxpayers of Ames and the supporters of the university be given the full story.

For until we get that full story, we can only guess.

And the guesses - aided by a hint here, a wink there and a tough letter from the Attorney General's office - can lead to only one conclusion.

Leonard Goldman should resign.

If he doesn't, he should be fired.