Decision due in Galatolo case — DA investigating his handling of contracts and harassment

Ron Galatolo
Daily Post Staff Writer

A decision on whether former San Mateo County Community College District Chancellor Ron Galatolo will face charges from the District Attorney’s Office may come late next month, the DA said Dec. 10.

District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe’s office is investigating alleged harassment and improper business dealings by Galatolo. …
Premium Content: To read the rest of this article, please click here and Sign In or Subscribe to access our paid site.
If you have a Daily Post Archives account, your access includes Premium Content such as this article. Enter your Archives Username and Password, and you will be redirected to the article.
If you are a first-time user, please Subscribe to select a plan that meets your needs, and create an account to view premium content such as this article.

1 Comment

  1. The Board’s Gambit

    Was the San Mateo County Community College District (SMCCCD) Board of Trustees outplayed? They reached a settlement agreement removing long time Chancellor Ron Galatolo from his job in August 2019. The public was never informed why nor how this was beneficial to SMCCCD. The separation agreement specified the ouster was due to “disputes” in their employment relationship.

    The agreement gave Mr. Galatolo a new employment contract as Chancellor Emeritus totaling $1.2 million until March of 2022. This was odd. Why would you rehire someone with whom you had “disputes”? This smelled like a quid pro quo.

    Three days later, the District Attorney executed a search warrant investigating Galatolo. Then the Board placed Galatolo on paid administrative leave. The Board claimed this action was unrelated to the DA’s investigation, which after fifteen months should conclude soon.

    If the DA clears Mr. Galatolo’s name, will the Board rescind their action and put the Chancellor Emeritus back to work?

    Alternatively, as the Board claimed Galatolo’s administrative leave was unrelated to the DA’s investigation, one assumes the Board conducted their own internal inquiry of some issue. If Mr. Galatolo’s name is cleared internally, will he resume his responsibilities as Chancellor Emeritus?

    Should damaging information be uncovered, Mr. Galatolo has the SMCCCD Board in check. In an unusual employment arrangement providing Galatolo job security, the Board is precluded from firing the Chancellor Emeritus. Only an outside arbitrator can terminate his Chancellor Emeritus contract “for cause” as Chancellor Emeritus; this clause holds him harmless for past infractions as Chancellor.

    Check mate.

Comments are closed.