Chancellor Goldsmith’s Cost for the District: Part 1 of 2
The High Cost of Retaliation: A Burden on Taxpayers
As the New Semester Begins: A Call to Action and Gratitude
As the new semester begins and faculty return to campuses, we believe it’s the perfect time to share a critical report that sheds light on a less-examined aspect of Chancellor Goldsmith’s leadership: the staggering cost of her administration’s legal battles. Before diving into this article, we have two important requests for you:
First, all we ask in return for the significant resources we invest in preparing these articles is that you subscribe to our Substack—completely free of charge. Subscribing not only supports our work but also helps us bypass the District’s attempts at censorship. By subscribing, you ensure these critical reports reach your inbox directly, free from interference or being labeled as spam. Should censorship occur, it provides yet another opportunity for organizations like The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) or the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to take action. After all, as history shows, legal accountability seems to be the only language Chancellor Goldsmith truly understands.
Second, as the semester unfolds, it’s crucial to recognize and appreciate the tireless efforts of classified professionals who play an essential role in keeping the District running smoothly. If you’re a faculty member or administrator, take a moment tomorrow to express your gratitude to the classified professionals you work closely with. A simple acknowledgment of their contributions can go a long way, and offering a little grace at the start of the semester can make a meaningful difference for everyone involved.
Let’s start this semester with both clarity and kindness for those who truly deserve it.
The Cost of Kindness
If you’ve spent any time around Chancellor Goldsmith, you’ve undoubtedly encountered her mantra: “Be kind”. The Fall 2024 District Convocation, widely known as “The Carol-Con”, was filled with such rhetoric. However, the testimonies and evidence we’ve gathered reveal a stark contradiction between Chancellor Goldsmith’s words and actions. Her interpretation of kindness seems to apply primarily to how others treat her and her allies—not how they treat others.
We are both surprised and encouraged by how our stories have inspired others to step forward and share their experiences and evidence with us. Even some of Chancellor Goldsmith’s closest allies appear to have grown disillusioned with her leadership. Sources close to her describe her as a leader who allegedly harbors resentment, holds grudges, and uses her position to retaliate—either directly or through proxies—against anyone she perceives as obstructing her goals. According to these sources, her goals often involve disregarding State and District regulations, flouting long-standing practices, undermining organizational norms, and subverting institutional stakeholders. While our previous stories have exposed some of these troubling behaviors, the deeper implications are just beginning to surface.
Nowhere is Chancellor Goldsmith’s hypocrisy regarding “kindness” more evident than in the unrestrained escalation of the District’s legal costs under her leadership. The “be kind” mantra may sound admirable, but the numbers tell a very different story. A review of the District’s budgets from 2015-16 to 2024-25 reveals a dramatic increase in legal costs since Chancellor Goldsmith assumed leadership of the District on January 1, 2022.
For your convenience, here are the documented costs of the District’s legal services from 2015-16 to the present:
2015-16: $299,954
2016-17: $249,428
2017-18: $335,740
2018-19: $504,420
2019-20: $252,764
2020-21: $803,323
2021-22: $306,957
2022-23: $847,095
2023-24: $1,271,117
2024-25: $1,280,000 (projected by the District)
The trend is undeniable: under Chancellor Goldsmith’s administration, legal costs have escalated to unprecedented levels.
To better understand this alarming increase, we consulted managing partners at two prominent law firms specializing in employment law. Both expressed concern over the dramatic rise in costs and pointed out that the firms contracted by the District specialize in investigations and litigation for educational institutions. While we lacked access to detailed invoices, these experts identified litigation as the likely primary driver, with individual lawsuits easily costing hundreds of thousands of dollars.
They explained that when employees are treated unfairly or unlawfully dismissed, they frequently seek legal recourse. Litigation, though relatively inexpensive for employees—who are often charged only after securing a settlement or damages—places a substantial financial burden on employers, who must defend these cases at considerable cost.
As we’ve reported previously, the retaliatory culture fostered by Chancellor Goldsmith is almost certainly at the root of the District’s skyrocketing legal expenses. The District now spends millions of dollars annually defending her leadership style—resources that could have been far better utilized to support students, faculty, and staff. While “be kind” may sound like a virtuous mantra, in practice, Chancellor Goldsmith’s interpretation of kindness has become an extraordinarily costly burden for the District.
The Analysis
Before Chancellor Goldsmith’s appointment, the District’s average annual legal expenses hovered around $409,000. However, since her tenure began, these costs have skyrocketed—doubling to $847,095 in 2022-23 and tripling to $1,271,117 in 2023-24. The District’s projected legal costs for 2024-25 are $1,280,000, but based on past trends, our findings, and direct involvement in assisting employees seek legal representation, this figure is likely a significant underestimation.
The graph above illustrates the alarming escalation of the District’s legal costs following Chancellor Goldsmith’s appointment. Here’s what it depicts:
The Y-axis represents the District’s legal costs in millions of dollars.
The X-axis represents the years.
The blue dotted line represents the average cost of legal services prior to Chancellor Goldsmith’s appointment in January 2022, serving as a baseline for comparison. This baseline average was $409,000.
The green dotted line, generated through a linear regression analysis, projects future legal costs based solely on pre-Goldsmith trends.
The yellow line shows the actual legal costs incurred by the District.
The contrast between the yellow and green lines is striking: under Chancellor Goldsmith’s leadership, actual legal costs have surged dramatically, far exceeding historical expectations.
Our sources warn that an avalanche of lawsuits is likely to hit the District in 2025. If the volume of referrals we’ve made to attorneys is any indication, the District must realistically budget far more than its current projection to cover its legal costs in 2025.
The Cost of the Office of General Counsel
The legal services costs outlined above exclude the substantial expenses associated with the District’s in-house attorney, General Counsel Kirsten Corey, and her executive assistant.
According to the Transparent California database, the expenses for the Office of the General Counsel have been as follows:
2022:
Total Cost: $310,636
General Counsel’s Total Pay and Benefits: $214,351
Executive Assistant’s Total Pay and Benefits: $96,285
2023:
Total Cost: $400,876
General Counsel’s Total Pay and Benefits: $292,163
Executive Assistant’s Total Pay and Benefits: $108,713
When these costs are included, the District’s total legal expenses—including the Office of the General Counsel—amount to nearly $850,000 in 2022, nearly $1.7 million in 2023, and approximately $1.8 million in 2024. Looking ahead to 2025, we estimate that the Office of the General Counsel will cost between $450,000 and $500,000, while external legal services could easily total $2,000,000. This brings the projected total legal expenses for 2025 to approximately $2.5 million—a staggering figure that underscores the escalating financial burden of the District’s mounting legal challenges under Chancellor Goldsmith’s leadership. A leadership that promises “kindness” but delivers retribution and retaliation instead.
District’s Contracted Law Firms
Based on the District’s records, while Chancellor Goldsmith has been in office, the District has and continues to employ the following 14 law firms:
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore (LCW)
Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud & Romo (AALRR)
Fagen Friedman Fulfrost LLP (F3 Law)
Lozano Smith LLP
Best Best & Krieger, LLP (BBK)
Gregory Taylor Law Corporation
Law Office of C. W. Hine
Parker & Covert LLP
Public Agency Law Group
Law Office of Anthony J. Sperber
Musick, Peeler & Garrett LLP
Jelladian Buchner Law, APC
Thompson & Horton LLP
The Law Offices of Dan Epperly & Associates, PC
One in-house attorney, 14 law firms, and tens of attorneys across these firms are supported by a multi-million-dollar budget—all to sustain Chancellor Goldsmith’s leadership style, which has been marked by alleged retaliation and legal conflicts. These figures do not account for the costs of hiring and training replacements, nor the broader lost opportunities associated with her approach to leadership.
The Spikes
Even the spikes in legal costs during outlier years of 2018-19 and 2020-21, can allegedly be traced back to Chancellor Goldsmith’s vendetta-driven actions. One particularly costly example is her relentless pursuit of terminating Coach Edward Madec from Fresno City College. According to our sources, Chancellor Goldsmith's actions in this case went far beyond standard administrative procedures, delving into litigation and questionable criminal proceedings that reportedly devastated Coach Madec’s life. This truly bizarre case underscores the extraordinary lengths Chancellor Goldsmith appears willing to go to settle personal grudges.
These actions alone have cost the District hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of dollars in legal expenses.
While we intend to publish a comprehensive report on Coach Madec in the near future, our preliminary findings suggest that the spikes in the District’s legal costs during 2018-19 and 2020-21—when Chancellor Goldsmith was President of Fresno City College—are directly tied to her involvement in this case. Her actions set a troubling precedent and have left the District burdened with exorbitant legal fees, highlighting the financial and ethical toll of her leadership.
Cost of Retaliation and Silence
Retaliation, fear tactics, and hostility from the administration have allegedly become pervasive at SCCCD under Chancellor Goldsmith’s leadership, reaching unprecedented levels. According to our sources, she has terminated a record number of faculty and classified professionals—a fact she reportedly boasts about. Meanwhile, administrator attrition has hit an all-time high, and morale across the colleges has plummeted to historic lows. This creates a perfect storm for even more legal costs for the District.
Some of the cases expected to be filed this year are projected to cost the District a substantial amount to defend. These estimates do not include potential settlement payouts, judgments awarded, or likely increases in insurance premiums resulting from the District’s skyrocketing legal expenditures. The mounting financial and institutional toll demands immediate attention.
Our findings, along with our experiences assisting employees in seeking legal representation, strongly suggest that the District’s legal costs will continue to escalate. The cause is clear: “kindness” does not result in ballooning legal fees—retaliation and systemic efforts to silence dissent do.
Sources within the administration have reported alleged top-down directives that foster this troubling culture. Records of dismissals and disciplinary actions further reveal a consistent pattern of retaliation targeting those who challenge Chancellor Goldsmith or her inner circle. While our previous reports have highlighted some of these cases, upcoming investigations will expose more evidence of how Chancellor Goldsmith wields her position to reward allies and punish critics. These actions paint a disturbing picture of leadership priorities that come at great financial and institutional cost to the District.
Legal experts we consulted emphasized that resolving conflicts at the lowest possible level is far more cost-effective. Unfortunately, poor leadership—marked by unfair treatment and a pervasive culture of fear—inevitably leads to costly litigation. These are hallmarks of bad management, and the District’s soaring legal expenses are the result.
The Board must recognize that Chancellor Goldsmith’s management of the District, characterized by retaliation, fear tactics, and dismissals, is laying the foundation for a cascade of lawsuits and significant legal liabilities. Behind closed doors, your Chancellor and General Counsel may reassure you that they are equipped to handle these cases. However, the numbers tell a starkly different story.
Sources suggest that Chancellor Goldsmith is allegedly fully aware of these legal risks yet chooses to disregard them, seemingly confident that the fallout will burden future administrations rather than her own. This approach, effectively “kicking the can down the road”, leaves taxpayers to shoulder the escalating costs and further destabilizes the District.
A Word for the Board
Did you know that you approved every single penny of the costs outlined above? Did you thoroughly examine the numbers she presented for your approval? Did you ask why and how the District’s legal costs have skyrocketed? You are the ones who have enabled Chancellor Goldsmith to wreak havoc—destroying lives, families, careers, and futures—while burdening the District and taxpayers with millions of dollars in preventable legal expenses. These costs could have been avoided if Chancellor Goldsmith had held her inner circle to the same standards of accountability that she imposes on those she perceives as opponents, and if she had extended kindness rather than treating dissent with hostility and disdain.
What Chancellor Goldsmith says and what she does are worlds apart. According to our sources, you, the Board, are deliberately kept isolated so she can operate without guardrails. While her silver tongue and uncanny ability to drum up support may have served her well so far, every facade eventually crumbles. Chancellor Goldsmith has made her bed, but it’s not too late for you to stop the proverbial bleeding. The question is: will you?
Your response to our exposés sends a clear message to the employees and the community. That message can either reflect denial and complicity—refusing to acknowledge the mistakes that allowed her to undermine the foundation of this institution—or accountability, by acting decisively once the truth is brought to light. The choice is yours, but make no mistake: the disclosures will continue until meaningful action is taken.
Chancellor Goldsmith’s actions have alienated and demoralized countless dedicated employees, leaving them with no choice but to speak out. Our publications have provided clarity for some and hope for others who aspire to a District that reflects the ideals Chancellor Goldsmith herself once outlined in an email compelled by a PERB charge filed by the Faculty Union:
A District that is “inclusive and committed to a workplace free from unlawful discrimination, harassment, retaliation, dominance, and interference.”
We are merely helping achieve this stated goal.
Our Updated Commitments to the SCCCD Board
Accountability
We have promised full transparency and accountability by including your names in our publications. Your ongoing inaction and failure to fulfill fiduciary responsibilities will remain permanently documented in digital archives for future scrutiny:
Danielle Parra
Robert A. Fuentes
Magdalena Gomez
Austin Ewell
Deborah J. Ikeda
Nasreen Johnson
Destiny Rodriguez
Haiden del Fierro
Broader Media Outreach
This article will be sent to 125 news organizations.
Communication with Community College Leaders
This article will be sent to 100 community college presidents, chancellors, and trustees.
Communication with the State Chancellor’s Consultation Council
We will send this article to the Consultation Council for State Chancellor Sonya Christian. In keeping with our promise to refrain from emailing SCCCD employees, we will exclude Vice Chancellor Mosier, who is part of the council.
Communication with Community Leaders and Politicians
This article will be sent to 600 politicians and community leaders across Fresno and the state of California.
Communication with Academic Senate Leaders
This article will now be sent to leaders in Areas A, B, C, and D covering all community colleges across California.
Communication with the ACCJC
We will share our articles directly with the ACCJC to ensure they are aware of these matters.
Communication with the United States Department of Education
We learned that some of the colleges in the District are recipients of Title V grants. We believe the Department of Education, particularly under the incoming administration, is interested in how its money is being spent. We intend to notify them.
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