You state that "The board members are elected by residents of the district" Isnt it true that at least two of the three who voted Graham out were appointed by the board not voted in by the public? This in itself raises the question of who owes who what in that crowd. I also find it odd that Patricia Einarson can sit on the board while having a practice in the district. This has to be a conflict of interest!

"The agreement's "Non-Disparagement" paragraph says both parties "...agree not to take action or make any statements that could cause the other party or parties any embarrassment or humiliation or otherwise reflect negatively on the parties or cause the other parties to be held in disrepute." It goes on to say that in the event of a violation, the "aggrieved party" has the right to seek legal relief."

Any employee who has been separated from the organization must sign the agreement in order to receive compensation to leave whether the choice is voluntary or involuntary. If either party breaches the agreement, the other can sue for damages. It is as simple as that.

As far as conflict is concerned, I would rather have someone practicing in the district having a say in governance rather than someone not practicing in the district or having someone who doesn't practice medicine trying to enforce decisions affecting the practice of others who do.

He should have been let go long before the Los Gatos property was bought. I quit donating before that purchase, but might reconsider after he is gone and the hospital is back on track.