OK Nelson, you always like to have the last word in the Comments section.

How about an explanation as to why you deserve to remain on the board after taking $231,567 away from our children?

Please resign before you cause even more damage!

Steven Nelson didn't "take" $231,567 away from the district. All five trustees voted to give that amount to Craig Goldman after he threatened to sue the district he dedicated his life to for 16 years. That was made absolutely clear as then-trustee Chiang repeatedly said the payment was necessary to avoid litigation.

So now any district employee can demand that they too deserve a settlement because they also had to work with this difficult person? Who hasn't had to put up with a difficult co-worker? Who gets a bonus equivalent to a year's pay for having to work with rude or inept co-workers? We'd all be retired by age 40.

@who stole from the kids?

Yes, the Trustees voted to pay the money. They did so because Goldman had a good chance of winning a lawsuit. He had that chance because of Nelson actions.

So you are saying all trustees are at fault? I say it's clear where the fault lies.

Not all district employees are entitled because (to date) Nelson hasn't acted quite so egregiously towards them. Just wait though . . . He has no impulse control so we can expect more fallout from his behavior to come (as long as he continues to serve on the board).

Remember, Nelson is not serving as just a "co-worker". As trustee he's at the same level as a President or CEO when interacting with the Superintendent. Misbehavior at that level has consequences.

- Public Service -- NOT

Your analogy is fatally flawed when you compare a trustee to a CEO. It's actually the superintendent who is the CEO in the district. The trustees of the district are like the corporate board members. It's a direct match. No one board member has more voting power than the others. Due to his marginalized treatment by the other board members, if anything, it's Steve Nelson who was impotent so far as Goldman was concerned. There is no grounds for a lawsuit against the district stemming from the sole actions of one trustee, just like there would be no such grounds for a CEO in a corporation. Part of the job description for a CEO or a Superintendent is dealing with an elected board. In the case of the school district, the board is elected by the public to represent their interests. Goldman is not going to be able to win a lawsuit alleging conflicting instructions or interests on the part of the board, as that is inherent.

The public doesn't know what goes on in closed sessions. There was a lot of heat and conflict between Goldman and the teachers union. Cast your eye in that direction. Note that Skelly did a lot of administrative house cleaning too. For all we know the board had blocked that action on the part of Goldman. Anything could have been happening.

Goldman got liquidated damages per his contract. There does not have to be specific grounds for a specific lawsuit to make that provision inoperable. Liquidated damages is an accepted contract principle.

Sorry, but the issue is whether Nelson has been and continues to be a liability to the district.

You can guess all you want about what happened behind closed doors, but it is laughable to think Goldman received that severance because of the teachers union.

It's always amazing to see to what lengths the Steve Nelson amen goes to in order to defend their man. Up is down, right is wrong, and facts get turned on their head.

Science fiction writers have nothing, compared to that crew.

No, that's no issue at all. The story is about Goldman severance.

>No, that's no issue at all. The story is about Goldman severance.

Yes, and as was clearly stated, the need to pay severance was due to Nelson, see excerpt from story below.

So Nelson clearly has been a liability to the district. Not sure why you are trying to whitewash him. In my opinion, he REMAINS a liability given his hot temper and lack of impulse control.

After the next outburst, we can expect any victim to demand an equal (or larger) settlement.

Nelson, please do us all a favor and RESIGN!


<Quote from article above>
The board feared being sued by Goldman, Chiang said, because of a hostile work environment created in large part by one board member, Steve Nelson — a revelation that probably surprised no one. In 2013, the board took the unusual step of censuring Nelson for violating the board's code of conduct, citing incidents that included sending inappropriate, insulting emails to district staff, shouting at them in the district office, and even reportedly angrily telling Goldman that he was "full of sh-t" in front of other staff members.

And the PAUSD Board also has to pay a negotiated "settlement" to an administrator that it apparently was glad to see go. Not that unusual. ($150,000). Necessary?
June 9th, 2015 article
Web Link

Seems like PAUSD gets a discount in it's settlements. The Mountain View district seems to like a quarter million dollars? 2009 "settlement" with a Huff teacher.
Web Link

It's highly unethical for Chiang to disclose what allegedly went on in closed sessions. In any event, it's only his opinion as to why the district provided severance to Goldman. The fact is that the contract provided for liquidated damages from the outset, long before there was any issue.

As the PAUSD watcher illustrates, such liquidated damages are not at all unusual. What is unusual is the gusto with which the crazies assign blame for the payment in this particular case. I'm sure the teachers of the district are glad to be rid of Goldman after all these years. There is logic in getting some new blood.

On the other hand, I don't agree with another of Chiang's pronouncements--that being that was is needed here is a superintendent with no experience in California or public education management in general really--so as to bring in a really fresh perspective. That may or may not work out, but I don't think you could tar all educational professionals applying for the role of superintendent with the Goldman brush of being too entrenched. Have fun with that. Blame it on my being a Steve Nelson supporter.

@Ethics

Well said. Chris Chiang did not serve our community well. Not only did he inappropriately disclose closed session business, he also pushed his cockamamie idea that the District needed a superintendent with no experience in California or in education management.

Then he resigned and burdened the community with either a special election or the political wrangling associated with an appointment.

His relentless accusations against a fellow trustee have been nothing more than a reflection of his own inability to govern as trustee.

@ Old MV Parent - you are correct about Chris Chiang.

Lots of smoke ( and mirrors ), but no fire.
FACT Nelson has and may still behave inappropriately. Belittling another professional ( and others ) in response to his/her/its duties.
I think the next course of action is to have a forced psychiatric evaluation done to see if Nelson is medically unfit to perform his duties properly. That would be a " show cause " reason for Nelson to be removed from his duties permanently.
Step back and take an overall look at MANAGEMENT functions that requires professionalism to make decisions for the good of the district. Abuse at this level could actually involve the MVPD in intervention!
Yet no one has involved Robert's Rules of Order to take care of and eliminate disruptive behavior in meetings, something that a Foothill College trained Debate student immediately noticed and commented on in a previous story!
Like the PAUSD dismissal of Skelly for OBVIOUS FEDERAL LAW BREAKING BEHAVIOR, you have an actual Assistant Superintendent living in Mountain View. " No Way " would she come out of retirement even if Nelson were removed from his duties. That answer says much about ongoing problems with the present board.
Get back to the basics; Using the " rules " in Robert's Rules of Order would be a good start. Realizing that there are GOALS to be met during meetings is another. Disruptive behavior during those meetings will be no longer allowed and a member of the MVPD can be appointed " Sargent of Arms " to make sure that the Robert's Rules of Order are followed.
Then people can get back to the job THAT TAXPAYERS WANT YOU TO DO: EDUCATE THE CHILDREN.

Alles Klar?

Speaking of Craig Goldman, look where the Man with the Golden Parachute ended up:

Web Link

He started in January 2015 as Interim CBO after leaving MVWSD with a year's salary. Then was just made permanent in May. There's a school district out there for everyone. Dance of the Lemons.

@Oh Boy!

Rather than exclaim about an agreement that is confidential, why not complain about the elected Trustee whose unprofessional behavior likely led to the agreement. Mr. Goldman did good work as our CBO, and many thought was doing a good job as Superintendent until the 2012 Elections. The entire board chose to renew him last March, then lost him in November. We'll hope they appoint somebody who understands professional conduct to fill the board vacancy.

Wow, so Chiang is unethical for providing some information regarding Goldman's settlement, but Nelson, whose outrageous behavior led to an easy quarter million for Goldman, is blameless?

Goldman *might* have received a severance even without Nelson's behavior, but given how Nelson behaved, he didn't have to negotiate very hard! Just wait until Nelson blows his top the next time. How much will it cost us then?

And yes, Chiang has left us in a difficult spot by resigning, but I really can't blame him for not being able to stand serving on the council with Nelson. I mean this guy admits to behaving poorly (he has publicly stated he would vote to censure himself), but just can't do anything about it. Perhaps he really does have metal issues; he is CERTAINLY a loose cannon. (Loves to threaten to sue people too!) I wouldn't have the stomach to serve on the board with him there either.

So Nelson, please do us all a big favor and just RESIGN! Better to save face and do it now, then to be forced to do it after you do something really stupid.

Glad to be out of this mess and done with MVWSD. It seems like year after year it gets worse. You made the PACT a school now you gotta live with the consequences . To bad at one time this district had a reputation of being a wonderful place to educate your kids. Kinda a melting pot, every kid was treated equally. Not a child or parent felt any different or less than, numbers didn't count, class meant room. It wasn't about money, it was the kids. You continue to make it about your egos. In recent years you make it about borders and comparing groups of kids separating and hogwash touchy feely educational crap. Making yourself sound like heros cuz you sacrificed chairs for a student. You used that child as a chip in your negotiations to expand your school. It's up to this board to bring it back around to educating or kids. How about less stress on kids back to basic fundamentals . Where is the BOARD OF EDUCATION on this mess!! Let's get a school in s our neighborhoods.

Greg Dannis' law firm is a revolving door of attorneys. No one stays at the firm, and it's pretty clear why.

So based on Web Link
Craig Goldman is specializing as a district official in charge of tough union negotiations.

I guess this is all due to S. Nelson, as was the acrimony between Goldman as MVWSD Superintendent and the teachers. Everyone else just wanted to hand out monster raises, but Goldman was coaxed by S. Nelson not to do that.

@Craig Goldman and Unions - what exactly are you trying to say? Your message is not clear.

@ More Than Enough

Goldman's current contract is NOT confidential. It's public and posted for the public to see, otherwise how would I have gotten it?

Goldman did not do a good job. He was arrogant bully but thin-skinned, overcrowded our classrooms even while we were sitting on a huge reserve, pitted one group against another, and left less than mid year to pursue another opportunity AFTER having threaten our district for a quarter of a million dollar of our kids' money. Nelson is not blameless, but Goldman doesn't get a pass either, so don't defend him. When the Belmont-Redwood Shores School District's current Sup leaves, I'm sure Goldman will step up as their superintendent. Like I said, dance of the lemons.

The settlement is confidential, not the CBO contract. You were not there, best not to take sides. I never found him arrogant although many JD's certainly are. Did not have new job when agreement was reached. You are certainly entitled to your "lemon" opinion. Many districts have this issue. We need to attract better professionals, by electing better board members.

It looks like a revolving door for losers in this school district. I pointed out Skelly's flaws ( lying and stealing ) and now this district gets fleeced again.
The only problem and what is really sad is these people get paid WITH OUR CHILDREN'S MONEY! Stop trying to keep the SS Whisman afloat by drilling holes in her keel.
At the next top level meeting, use my above suggestions to get your work done, or have enough professionalism to resign and let better people do a better job in a more professional manner. Let the MVPD do it's job too. The disruptions MUST STOP. That is how pros handle business.