1997
|
EDITORIAL WRITING |
|
Index | 3/18 | 4/1 | 6/28 | 7/31 | 8/28 | 10/8 | 10/18 | 12/3 | 12/23
|
Goldman and ISU need to split paths
October 8, 1996 - 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. |