In our previous articles, we have repeatedly exposed how Chancellor Carole Goldsmith’s leadership has drained the District’s finances, racking up exorbitant legal costs under the guise of “kindness”. The kind of kindness that is a one-way street—expected when others interact with her and her allies, while replaced with vitriol, retaliation, and hostility toward anyone who dares to question or challenge her.
One example of someone on the receiving end of her vitriol is Mr. Ed Madec. This week has been particularly disastrous for Chancellor Goldsmith, as she suffered two more courtroom defeats at the hands of Mr. Ed Madec—just the latest in a long series of embarrassing legal losses. One might assume that such repeated failures would serve as a lesson in accountability but experience, however harsh, means little to a leader who isn’t paying the price herself. After all, it’s the taxpayers footing the bill for her personal vendettas. While the Board—charged with safeguarding taxpayer dollars—sits idly in the passenger seat, Chancellor Goldsmith continues to steer the District toward ruin. We intentionally delayed publishing this story to ensure Mr. Madec’s cases received the attention they rightfully deserves. And while two blows in one week might seem like a serious setback, we believe in the rule of threes.
Legal fees, courtroom losses, and her exorbitant pay—grossly out of pace with previous Chancellors and the market—are only part of the financial toll of Chancellor Goldsmith’s tenure. Another glaring example is the infamous “Carole-Con”—a term coined by frustrated employees to describe the costly District’s Convocation Day at the start of each Fall semester. What was pitched to faculty as a meaningful professional development event has instead turned out to be an expensive, self-congratulatory spectacle, designed to feed Chancellor Goldsmith’s ego—at the taxpayers’ expense.
How Did Carole-Con Come to Be?
Carole-Con originated from an additional duty day negotiated by the District as part of the Faculty Union’s (SCFT) new contract, approved in 2022. To secure this extra workday, the District agreed to certain SCFT demands and labeled this day as a “professional development” opportunity for faculty. However, under Chancellor Goldsmith’s regime, the concept of professional development has been severely distorted and stretched to its breaking point. Our sources confirmed that faculty professional development policies fall under the jurisdiction of the Academic Senates, as outlined in Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations. Faculty input isn’t just customary—it’s legally required. Yet Chancellor Goldsmith reportedly sees shared governance as a mere formality—a bureaucratic box to check (or not), not a principle to uphold. Her disregard for participatory governance is not new—as we previously detailed in her Competency-Based Education (CBE) and Nursing Department overreach. Chancellor Goldsmith allegedly views faculty as subjects of her “queendom”, where their input—and even the regulations that mandate it—are treated as little more than inconvenient formalities she can bypass at will.
Rather than consulting the Academic Senates, Chancellor Goldsmith unilaterally implemented this so-called “professional development” day for faculty. The faculty, classified professionals, and even administrators immediately recognized the event lacked much input or value—leading them to refer to it derisively with the now-infamous nickname, Carole-Con. This blatant disregard for shared governance is yet another example of her pattern of consolidating power while undermining or flatly ignoring the voices of those who should be leading the conversation.
The first Carole-Con debuted in the Fall of 2023 and its true intent became clear almost immediately. Rather than serving as a meaningful professional development day, the event felt more like a coronation—an extravagant display of self-promotion and grandstanding at taxpayer expense. The agenda? A parade of meaningless charts, all carefully designed to inflate Chancellor Goldsmith’s accomplishments while failing to provide any real insights. The activities of the day were so detached from classroom realities that only someone with no teaching experience, like Chancellor Goldsmith, could believe they were beneficial to the faculty.
A Megalomaniac in Academic Robes
Our work has made it clear to us that Chancellor Goldsmith does not see faculty or classified employees as dedicated professionals but rather as lazy and untrained subordinates in need of her personal brand of “training”. She insists on shaping faculty development according to her vision, not theirs—a vision shaped with negligible classroom experience. What Chancellor Goldsmith fails to grasp is that faculty don’t enter this profession by accident. Faculty are educators because of the drive to teach, to improve, and to serve students.
This additional duty day could have been transformed into a truly valuable learning opportunity. Instead, Carole-Con stands as a glaring example of her leadership philosophy—an authoritarian approach where she perceives herself as the sole authority, flanked by loyalists and “yes-people”, while faculty, classified professionals, and even administrators are dismissed as mere proverbial sheep in need of a shepherd. Her unilateral decisions reflect a broader leadership philosophy that prioritizes control over collaboration. It’s a management style reminiscent of a bygone, authoritarian era, draped in the language of modern governance but rooted in autocracy. Her leadership style bears an uncanny resemblance to a certain figure who thrives on loyalty tests, demands absolute control, and views dissent as betrayal.
This autocratic approach is further compounded by her well-documented track record of retaliation, threats, and suppression of dissent—tactics we have repeatedly exposed. These are not the actions of a collaborative leader but rather the hallmarks of a despot. Only autocrats seek out and punish dissenters while silencing the press and limiting dialogue.
To most faculty, staff, and administrators, Carole-Con is nothing more than a costly vanity project—a hollow spectacle that adds zero educational value while draining District funds. Many have voiced their concern that this extravagant production could be better spent on real professional development designed and led by faculty. But instead, Carole-Con continues to serve as nothing more than a glorified pep rally for Chancellor Goldsmith—one with an outrageous price tag and no return on investment for the District or our students.
The Cost
One of the key questions we set out to answer was: How much is this one-day spectacle really costing taxpayers? The answer is staggering and exposes a glaring case of fiscal mismanagement.
Vendors
A review of District purchase orders and vendor payments for Carole-Con reveals an alarming level of spending. The initial approved contract with the Fresno Convention & Entertainment Center was $31,980:
However, as we delved deeper, we found that the total cost of venue rental may have surpassed the approved purchase orders. We uncovered multiple purchase order agreements between the District and the Fresno Convention & Entertainment Center:
$40,635 on July 19, 2023
$10,016.45 on September 19, 2023:
In addition, the District paid $12,500 for the event’s keynote speaker.
Curiously, despite no food expenses being explicitly listed in the approved documents, sources informed us that Pardini’s Catering was likely used to provide meals for the 2023 event. Our review of purchase orders corroborates this claim, revealing a hefty payment of $68,937 to Pardini’s Catering on September 18, 2023:
Beyond these costs, Carole-Con also served as a lucrative opportunity for RSS Consulting, a firm closely connected to Chancellor Goldsmith. According to our sources, RSS Consulting provided training to administrators and Academic Senate leaders during the event. Although we could not determine which exact payment covered these services, we found the following payments made to RSS Consulting within the same time frame:
$100,000 on August 1, 2023
$12,000 on August 26, 2023
$45,000 on July 7, 2023
$22,500 on July 11, 2023
$15,000 warrant register on August 8, 2023
$12,000 warrant register on August 29, 2023
Being conservative, we assume that at least $12,000 was allocated for RSS Consulting’s training at Carole-Con.
In addition to the venue, catering, keynote speaker, and training costs, we estimate that the District ordered approximately 900 goodie bags, each filled with stickers, pens, writing pads, and a branded glass—all topped off with expensive yet completely unnecessary badges. If the estimated cost per participant was $25, this frivolous expenditure alone would amount to $22,500.
Adding up these numbers, the total vendor expenditure for the 2023 Carole-Con reaches a staggering $166,588. But even that is only part of the true cost.
Employee Salaries
The true financial burden of Carole-Con extends beyond vendor payments—it includes the salaries and benefits paid to faculty, classified, and administrators for attending the event.
In 2023, there were about 750 full-time faculty members in the District who were required to attend Carole-Con.
According to data from Transparent California, the average total salary and benefits for full-time faculty in 2023 was about $164,322.
With 178 duty days per year, the cost per faculty member per duty day was $164,322 ÷ 178 days = $923.
The total amount paid to full-time faculty for attending Carole-Con was 750 faculty × $923 = $692,250.
Most administrators and their executive assistants also attended the event, further inflating costs:
Based on our calculations, the average administrator (we counted executive assistants as administrators) was paid $907.48 per 222 duty days.
With about 137 administrators in the District, the total cost of administrator salaries for Carole-Con was $124,325.
Therefore, the total cost of employees’ salary and benefits for attending Carole-Con was $692,250 + $124,325 = $816,575.
The Grand Total
Adding full-time faculty and administrator salaries and benefits to vendor payments brings the total cost of Carole-Con in 2023 to a staggering $983,163.
While we were unable to determine the exact number of classified professionals or part-time faculty who attended, their exclusion from our calculations means the true cost is even higher. A very conservative estimate of their salaries and benefits pushes the total well above $1 million for 2023 alone.
The 2024 financial data from Transparent California is not yet available, but with rising costs, it is highly unlikely that the price tag decreased. This means that, even using the most cautious estimates, the total cost of indulging Chancellor Goldsmith’s ego through Carole-Con in 2023 and 2024 exceeded $2 million.
The taxpayers and SCCCD students continue to shoulder the financial burden of a needy… attention hungry leader who has already cost the District millions in legal fees—expenses that are only expected to grow with additional pending litigation. And for what? A spectacle of self-indulgence masquerading as professional development.
But don’t just take our word for it—many have spoken out against Carole-Con’s wastefulness and futility. Let us remind you:
“omigosh, the convocation was not a success. What, exactly, did it accomplish?? And the notification(s) about it were cringe-worthy: We're ‘esteemed,’ everything is ‘innovative,’ etc.”
“The added convocation day was long and gone deaf. It was a big rally instead of a meaningful experience. I would have loved for a real speaker to be brought in. I would also encourage her to write shorter emails that feel personal. Her emails are long and sound like AI wrote them.”
“Get rid of that unnecessary all-district convocation that was just initiated this past August.”
“We (faculty) are more than just numbers. Her convocation presentation said otherwise.”
“Friendly but maybe self-important? The idea that faculty should have an extra full day of training so that she can be in charge of one of the days seems excessive.”
“Micromanages. Muzzles colleges' leadership while wrongly empowering some deans. Power is going to her head. … 'CaroleCon' is not a compliment.”
“The Chancellor is egocentric and seems to spend money and resources promoting herself and her self interests. The convocation was a waste of money and valuable time that could have been used for faculty/departments to work together to plan for the year. She interferes with curriculum and makes decisions based on some sort of personal agenda without consultation with faculty stakeholders. Her boundaries are inappropriate.”
All of this unfolds while the Board of Trustees stands idly by, refusing to stop the proverbial bleeding. Our group, along with many of our sources, is baffled by their inaction. How much more mismanagement must be exposed before the Board steps in? What level of fiscal irresponsibility, retaliation, and ethical violations will it take for them to finally act? Do they need law enforcement and a national scandal to finally take action?
Let us be clear, some of the most damning revelations are still to come. We deliberately withheld certain investigations, giving the Board an opportunity to step up and exercise oversight. Yet, time and again, they have signaled their unwillingness to intervene. We hear you, Trustees—loud and clear. Your employees hear you. Your students hear you. The taxpayers hear you. We all hear you.
Just as a reminder, in case you’ve forgotten, below is the exact language from the Chancellor’s contract detailing how she can be terminated—whether for cause or without cause:
State Center Community College District (SCCCD) - Fresno City College (FCC) - Madera Community College (MCC)- Clovis Community College (CCC) - Reedley College (RC) - Dr. Carole Goldsmith - Chancellor Goldsmith - Magdalena Gomez - Danielle Parra - Robert A. Fuentes - Austin Ewell - Deborah J. Ikeda - Nasreen Johnson - Destiny Rodriguez - Haiden del Fierro