Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legal Settlements topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discloses two Office of Administrative Hearings settlements approved in closed session
Summary
The Mountain View–Los Altos Union High School District board voted in closed session to approve two compromise agreements to resolve Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) claims, authorizing district payments and program support for affected students.
The Mountain View–Los Altos Union High School District Board of Trustees on Jan. 27 said in open session that it approved two compromise agreements reached in closed session with the Office of Administrative Hearings to resolve claims against the district.
Board President announced that in closed session the board voted to approve a compromise agreement in OAH case number 2024100708 and a second compromise agreement in OAH case number 2024110504. The first settlement was described in the meeting record as “a compromise agreement … in exchange for a total not to exceed 72,731, 0.25 in funding for alternate program for a student during the 2024–25 school year and 2025 extended school year.” The second was recorded as a settlement “in exchange for $64,000 in funding for an alternate program for [a] student through the 2025–26 school year, and $6,000 in attorney fees.”
The board reported the action in open session after the closed-session vote; the meeting record states the board voted 5–0 to approve both agreements. No additional details about the students involved or the exact disbursement schedule were included in the public record at the time the board returned to open session.
Nut graf: The district’s disclosure gives summary amounts and OAH case numbers and confirms the board’s approval, but it does not include identifying information about the students or full settlement terms. The board followed its closed-session procedures to resolve confidential personnel/education claims and reported the high-level results to the public.
Board communications at the meeting did not elaborate on who would administer the alternate program funding, or the specific services to be provided beyond the phrase “alternate program.” The board moved directly from announcing the closed-session approvals into recognition items on the agenda.
Ending: The board’s public statement provided case numbers and the settlement figures as recorded in the meeting transcript; the district did not provide further public documentation of the agreement terms at the meeting. Members of the public seeking the full settlement language would need to request records consistent with applicable privacy and education laws.
