Lawsuit Alert 1
Five in One
If you’re reading this in your email inbox, please note that the article is too long to appear in full. Click the button below to view the complete piece online.
The PDFs, images, and videos are marked with [PDF below], [image below], and [video below] so listeners on the Substack app know when to check their screen.
Please mark your calendar and plan to attend these two important meetings:
SCCCD Board of Trustees (BOT) meeting on Tuesday, November 4, at 3:30 p.m. in the District Office.
State Center Federation of Teachers (SCFT) Mega General Membership Meeting on Thursday, November 13, at 5:30 p.m. in the Fresno City College (FCC) Cafeteria. This in-person meeting is exclusively for SCFT members and requires an RSVP. At the meeting, SCFT leadership will present districtwide survey results on the BOT and district leadership, followed by group deliberation and next steps.
In our “September 2025 Board of Trustees Meeting Report: Part 2,” we exposed how Chancellor Carole Goldsmith, flanked by her unwavering and loyal shills, Trustee Nasreen Johnson and Vice Chancellor Julianna Mosier, attempted to downplay and gloss over the District’s skyrocketing legal expenses in a choreographed performance masquerading as serious discussion. The exchange was a transparent effort to deflect responsibility, shield incompetence, and normalize corruption. [video below]
At one point, in a display of breathtaking audacity, Goldsmith compared SCCCD’s runaway legal costs to those of the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD), a comparison as misleading as it was absurd. LACCD operates on a staggering $9.9 billion budget, more than twelve times as large as SCCCD’s modest $796 million, rendering her comparison not only invalid but deliberately deceptive.
Given Goldsmith’s and some trustees’ ongoing campaign to mislead and manipulate taxpayers and employees about the District’s mounting legal liabilities, we are launching a new investigative series: Lawsuit Alert. This series will track and expose the mounting lawsuits haunting SCCCD, most of which are glaring symptoms of Goldsmith’s self-styled leadership philosophy of “kindness and grace.”
In her own words, Goldsmith recently declared on a podcast:
“I’m going to keep showing up and I’m going to keep being kind because that’s how my parents and my grandparents kind of shared with me.”
It is difficult to understand how Goldsmith could define “kindness and grace” based on the example set by those who rejected and kicked her out of the house for being gay, something she cites every chance she gets,1234 but perhaps that very experience shaped her warped and distorted view of those values.
If she keeps being “kind,” the Board of Trustees (BOT) should brace for an avalanche of lawsuits, because under Goldsmith’s version of “kindness and grace,” lawsuits have become the District’s new curriculum. It looks like she is making her parents and grandparents very proud while filling the pockets of an ever-growing army of attorneys fighting her battles.
SCCCD’s deepening legal quagmire, entirely of Goldsmith’s making, is well documented in our previous articles. In “Chancellor Goldsmith’s Cost for the District: Part 1 of 2,” we revealed that legal expenses have tripled during her tenure. In “Destroying Lives Funded by the Taxpayers: Chapter 1,” we detailed her vendetta against Mr. Edward Madec. In “Destroying Lives Funded by the Taxpayers: Chapter 2,” we traced the roots of the explosion of legal expenses to a toxic combination consisting of a rogue and vindictive leader who thrives on retaliation, unlimited taxpayer funds, a legal billing system that incentivizes law firms to maximize billable hours by engineering and protracting litigation, and most shamefully, a Board of Trustees that has abdicated its fiduciary responsibility, favoring loyalty in lieu of oversight while enabling Goldsmith’s disastrous leadership. Finally, in “The Chancellor’s Henchman,” we documented Ms. Rozanne Hernandez’s lawsuit against SCCCD and Vice Chancellor Robert Frost, showing how this pattern plays out on the ground.
This first installment of Lawsuit Alert examines five ongoing legal battles fueled by Goldsmith’s retaliatory leadership. The cases involve Ms. Teresa Tarazi, a cohort of deaf and hard-of-hearing students, Ms. Karen Ainsworth, Ms. Jeanine Castle, and Dr. Gennean Bolen. Each lawsuit exposes systemic failures that directly contradict the District’s public commitments to equity, access, and employee rights. Together, they paint a damning portrait of an institution where discrimination, retaliation, and neglect have become normalized under a chancellor who weaponizes “kindness” as cover for cruelty.
1. Teresa Tarazi v. SCCCD
Filed on January 17, 2023, Tarazi v. SCCCD stands as a deeply troubling testament to religious discrimination, retaliation, and administrative misconduct under Goldsmith’s leadership. You can find the complaint below. [PDF below]
Tarazi, an English instructor at FCC since 1998 and a full-time faculty member since 2000, built a longstanding record of service and success in the classroom. By 2017, she was teaching entirely online, years before the pandemic, effectively proving her job could be performed remotely without any need for physical presence on campus.
Tarazi was reportedly one of the first instructors to bring online learning to FCC and earn her online certification through Cerro Coso Community College. She was also selected to teach in the Online Educational Initiative, a California online program that allowed instructors from various community colleges to teach students across California. Tarazi was also a presenter at the National Online Conference and helped to bring Canvas to SCCCD. A well-liked instructor by both students and faculty, Tarazi is one of the few instructors selected to be on the FCC’s Library Wall.
According to the complaint, the controversy began when SCCCD adopted its 2021 COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Tarazi, whose sincerely held religious beliefs forbid vaccination and the submission of genetic information, applied for a religious exemption. While the District approved it on paper, it immediately imposed a rigid, one-size-fits-all “Targeted Reasonable Accommodation Agreement” that ignored her individual circumstances and failed to comply with a genuine interactive process. Shockingly, in the summer of 2021, an administrator reportedly stated that Tarazi was “too political” to receive an exemption, illustrating the District’s disregard for legal and ethical obligations.
According to the complaint, Vice Chancellor Mosier and other SCCCD officials, including Vice Chancellor of Operations Christine Miktarian and Director of Environmental Health and Safety Darren Cousineau, either ignored or perpetuated a hostile climate in which unvaccinated employees were openly ridiculed and targeted. The complaint cites Vice Chancellor Miktarian and Director Cousineau, along with other SCCCD leaders who were caught on social media ridiculing the unvaccinated and signaling they would be happy if the unvaccinated were fired. Tarazi formally documented these incidents in a Zoom meeting with Vice Chancellor Mosier, joined by Dean Tabitha Villalba and SCFT President Keith Ford, naming employees she accused of bullying and harassment. Despite her testimony, SCCCD allegedly took no action to address Tarazi’s serious and legitimate concerns.
According to the complaint, SCCCD refused to engage in a good-faith interactive process and therefore refused to provide reasonable accommodation, even though Tarazi had requested one on October 7, 2021.
By November 2021, Tarazi was forced to report for public testing at the Fresno City College campus, effectively “outing” her vaccination status in violation of privacy and safety standards. In December 2021, Tarazi was allowed to self-test from home before the District abruptly reversed course in January 2022, banning off-site tests and assigning her a single in-person class of five students—her first on-campus teaching duty since 2017—despite years of proof that her job could be done remotely. This action conveniently triggered new testing requirements that violated her religious and privacy objections.
Within weeks, Tarazi began filing formal complaints:
January 17, 2022: Legal objections were emailed to SCCCD.
January 19, 2022: EEOC charge was filed alleging religious discrimination.
January 21, 2022: Complaint was submitted to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.
Swift retaliation followed.
Allegedly Chancellor Goldsmith, willfully or through negligence, refused to investigate Tarazi’s complaints, both informal and formal, leaving her defenseless and without proper representation and support.
On February 25, 2022, SCCCD dismissed her internal complaint “without investigation,” accusing her of lacking evidence. She soon received a “memo of concern,” was placed on paid administrative leave on March 18, 2022, and was given a notice of termination on August 2, 2022.
By May 2022, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had signaled changes to its guidelines. When the CDC updated its COVID-19 guidance on August 12, 2022, eliminating distinctions between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals and ending routine screening, Tarazi requested she be fully reinstated. Instead, the District ignored both new health standards and Tarazi’s outstanding record and officially terminated her employment on September 2, 2022, two weeks after CDC’s official announcement. This decision highlighted and reinforced SCCCD’s discriminatory, retaliatory, and punitive environment.
In addition, Tarazi formally documented other forms of harassment and bullying at every supervisory level, including the Dean of the Humanities Division, the Vice President of Instruction, and the President at FCC, as well as the Vice Chancellor of Human Resources and the Chancellor at the District Office, and the Board of Trustees.
Her lawsuit, which remains active, alleges eight causes of action, including religious discrimination, harassment, retaliation, failure to accommodate, whistleblower retaliation, and First Amendment violations.
Tarazi’s complaint paints a vivid picture of an administration where employees are punished for dissent and exemplifies the ethical decay and retaliatory culture perpetuated by Goldsmith’s so-called leadership of “kindness and grace.”
Tarazi seeks damages, declaratory and injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees, aiming to hold SCCCD accountable for its unchecked ethical decay and retaliatory climate.
2. Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students v. SCCCD
Filed on January 18, 2023, this lawsuit marks a pivotal legal challenge by a cohort of FCC deaf and hard-of-hearing students against the District for systemic violations of disability and access laws and failures to provide equal access to education. You can find the complaint below. [PDF below]
The complaint is meticulous and damning, outlining not just isolated oversights but deeply ingrained practices within SCCCD and FCC that denied students qualified American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters, auxiliary aids, and effective communication in violation of the California Civil Code and the California Disabled Persons Act.
According to the complaint, the students experienced familiar but persistent barriers within SCCCD’s culture of neglect, including:
An ongoing shortage of qualified ASL interpreters, regularly leaving students without basic access to their education.
Chronic organizational failures in scheduling and providing interpreters for the full duration of classes, leading to interrupted or incomplete communication access.
Persistent architectural and physical barriers, with new construction and renovations since 1971 ignoring updated California accessibility standards, all of which the District was legally bound to implement.
The District’s failure denied students effective access and endangered their safety and educational experience. These failures directly contravened SCCCD’s mandatory duty under the California Disabled Persons Act and Government Code § 11135 to provide disabled students equal access to programs, services, facilities, and campus-life participation. The harm was allegedly concrete and severe: delayed progress, failed and dropped classes, humiliation, isolation, and emotional distress.
The District was explicitly aware and had actual and constructive knowledge of access problems going back years, yet refused corrective measures, even after formal requests from faculty and legal complaints.
Reportedly, faculty and then‑FCC Academic Senate President Michael Takeda repeatedly pressed the administration to fulfill its legal and ethical obligations to support these students. Their warnings, advocacy, and documented recommendations went unheeded.
Goldsmith can’t claim she was unaware; according to many sources, these problems existed at FCC while she was president, too. However, she blamed then-Chancellor Parnell for not getting things done, only to shrug it off once she gained the power to act. When it comes to Goldsmith, failures are always someone else’s fault.
This is not the first time SCCCD has faced legal action for failing to accommodate individuals with disabilities. In a 2018 lawsuit filed by Ms. Nancy Mitchell-Carroll against SCCCD, she made nearly identical allegations against both the District and Fresno City College. [PDF below]
At that time, then-President Goldsmith shifted the entire blame onto the District and the Chancellor. Ms. Mitchell-Carroll’s lawsuit was ultimately settled. Under Goldsmith’s regime, as the record now shows, change comes not through dialogue or decency but only through force, be it political or legal.
In their lawsuit, the students seek compensatory damages, statutory penalties, injunctive relief ordering the District to remove ongoing barriers and comply with state accessibility laws, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
Had SCCCD heeded its own faculty’s counsel years earlier, the students’ rights could have been upheld, and the District’s taxpayers would have been spared another costly lawsuit. Instead, Goldsmith’s so‑called “kindness and grace” have once again translated into exclusion, humiliation, and millions drained in legal fees that should have supported accessibility, not defended discrimination.
Goldsmith and Board’s empty words and duplicitous claims pretending to care about students come into sharp focus once her actions and words collide, as demonstrated by two useless Board resolutions. The first resolution, titled “Disability Awareness Month,” was approved at the October 2023 BOT meeting. [PDF below]
The second resolution, titled “Declaring April 15 as National American Sign Language Day,” was approved at the April 2024 BOT meeting. [PDF below]
So which is it: Is the Board of Trustees “committed to serving, inspiring, and promoting student success while improving student equity, inclusion and access to high-quality education,” as declared in both resolutions, or is it failing to “deliver effective communication as required by law…[and] comply with California access standards,” as alleged in the lawsuit by the students?
When asked whether to trust faculty and students or Goldsmith and the BOT with a well-documented history of denying and spinning reality, the choice is obvious.
This legal battle, joined by dozens of affected students, highlights systemic disregard for students with disabilities within SCCCD, adding to a pattern of institutional neglect and exclusion. It also stands as an urgent summons for independent oversight, immediate reforms, and meaningful accountability.
Goldsmith’s rhetoric of “kindness and grace” has resulted in the District spending public money to fight disabled students in court rather than fix barriers that the law, ethics, and common decency demand.
3. Karen Ainsworth v. SCCCD
Filed on June 12, 2024, Ms. Karen Ainsworth’s lawsuit exposes grave failures by SCCCD to ensure employee safety and protect against retaliation. Ainsworth, a dedicated 30-year employee of the District who served in various capacities, most recently in Admissions and Records, alleges a disturbing series of unsafe working conditions, negligence, and retaliatory actions that ultimately forced her into early retirement. You can find the complaint below. [PDF below]
As detailed in the complaint, in early January 2023, Ainsworth was assigned by the Vice President of Administration to perform security duties in the unprotected open lobby of the Herndon Campus at Clovis Community College. Reportedly, this perilous assignment placed her in regular proximity to life-threatening situations, including a firearm discharge, encounters with armed and erratic individuals, and those suffering from substance addiction and exhibiting paranoid religious fervor. Despite repeated warnings and requests, multiple levels of administration and the campus safety chain of command, including the Vice President of Administration, were aware of these dangerous conditions but failed to intervene, improve her work environment, and protect her safety.
According to the complaint, the relentless stress culminated on February 2, 2023, when Ainsworth suffered a psychiatric injury directly caused by these hazardous conditions. She sought help through various District offices, including Student Services, Environmental Health and Safety, and Human Resources, but was consistently met with indifference, negligence, and outright refusal of support.
By April 21, 2023, in a shocking dismissal of her plight, Ainsworth was informed that she was not covered by the District’s Injury Prevention Program and that no proactive safety measures would be implemented going forward. Faced with an ongoing hostile environment and administrative abandonment, she was effectively coerced into early retirement as of April 24, 2023.
Ainsworth’s complaint layers multiple violations, including retaliation under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), failure to prevent retaliation, constructive discharge, negligence, retaliation for whistleblowing, and retaliation for raising health and safety concerns. The complaint meticulously documents the severe emotional and psychological toll exacted by the District’s blatant disregard for employee well-being: emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, economic losses, and punitive damages to redress systemic failures. It lays bare the everyday reality of Goldsmith’s “kindness and grace.”
Ainsworth seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief and payment of attorneys’ fees.
This lawsuit stands as a stark warning of the toxic climate pervading SCCCD under Goldsmith’s leadership: a culture that prioritizes institutional convenience over employee safety, sacrifices employee well-being, and punishes those who speak out for basic protections. Ainsworth’s experience underscores how deeply neglect have become embedded, reinforcing the urgent need for accountability and systemic reform.
4. Jeanine Castle v. SCCCD
Filed on December 13, 2024, this lawsuit exposes SCCCD’s alleged disability discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination that Ms. Jeanine Castle, a longtime counselor at FCC and a dedicated employee since 1997, endured. You can find the complaint below. [PDF below]
According to the complaint, the ordeal began when Castle was involved in an altercation with a coworker on campus. She sustained severe injuries, including trauma to her arm, shoulder, head, and trigeminal nerve, leaving her with trigeminal neuralgia, a condition that amplifies pain from everyday environmental stimuli such as noise and bright light. Despite promptly reporting the incident to campus police and requesting an internal investigation, the response was delayed and ineffective. Castle alleges that the aggressor faced no meaningful consequences and continued a pattern of verbal, physical, and psychological intimidation with impunity.
Reportedly, Castle repeatedly sought reasonable accommodations, including office relocation and flexible work hours, to mitigate these symptoms and avoid contact with her harasser. Despite providing medical documentation and complying with administrative requests, Castle’s accommodation efforts were consistently denied.
Throughout this period, Castle submitted formal complaints and memos alerting SCCCD leadership to the hostile workplace conditions, but those in power failed to intervene in a timely or effective manner. Castle’s health deteriorated because SCCCD leadership’s persistent neglect amplified the stress and adversity she faced daily at work.
According to the complaint, although SCCCD initiated an interactive process and required Castle to submit extensive medical documentation and attend numerous meetings, the resolution was limited to forced medical leave. Castle was directed to remain away from the workplace, systematically exhausting her medical, family, and sick leave without a permanent accommodation.
During this period of forced leave, Castle received a notice of termination. The complaint alleges this termination was wrongful and a direct result of Castle’s protected disability status and the retaliatory environment fostered by SCCCD.
Castle’s complaint asserts multiple causes of action, including disparate treatment based on disability; hostile work environment harassment; retaliation; failure to prevent harassment, discrimination, and retaliation; failure to provide reasonable accommodations; and wrongful termination. She seeks compensatory and punitive damages, injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees, and other relief as allowed by law.
This case stands as a potent example of SCCCD’s institutional failure to protect vulnerable employees and uphold state laws guaranteeing workplace safety and disability rights, consistent with the broader narrative of dysfunction under the District’s leadership.
5. Gennean Bolen v. SCCCD
The latest lawsuit against the District was filed on June 13, 2025, by Dr. Gennean Bolen. The complaint lays bare a chilling case of alleged disability discrimination, retaliation, and systemic failure to provide reasonable accommodations, the latest in SCCCD’s growing list of legal and moral disgraces. You can find the complaint below. [PDF below]
Dr. Gennean Bolen, a tenured English professor at FCC since 2000, alleges that she was subjected to years of mistreatment after disclosing her disability and requesting a reasonable accommodation to continue teaching online. After teaching 100 percent online since 2017, a mode of instruction approved long before the pandemic and proven to work, Dr. Bolen’s health took a downturn in 2019 due to severe anxiety and depression, conditions diagnosed and verified by medical providers. When she requested to continue teaching remotely, a low-cost, practical solution the District had granted to countless part-time faculty, she was met not with empathy or “kindness and grace” but with punishment.
Dr. Bolen’s complaint outlines a pattern of retaliatory conduct by SCCCD’s administration and HR officials, including Vice Chancellor Mosier, Ms. Sandi Edwards, Dean Villalba, and outside consultant Angel Ho. Notably, in a January 2021 interactive process meeting, Dr. Bolen and SCFT representatives heard an automated voice announce, “the recording is now full.” Realizing she was being recorded without consent, Dr. Bolen filed a police report and a formal complaint against the college. Then‑FCC President Carole Goldsmith personally “investigated” the complaint, admitting the recording occurred yet conveniently failing to determine its source or hold anyone accountable.
Dr. Bolen’s medical documentation made clear that her disability was permanent and that she could perform all essential job functions teaching online, a practice already standardized districtwide. Still, SCCCD systematically refused to accommodate her, while assigning online sections to part-time instructors who lacked seniority. The District then issued a “90‑day notice” of unprofessional conduct in January 2022, resurrecting years‑old performance notes previously deemed resolved and adding minor paperwork issues as pretext for discipline. Despite her documented compliance with these directives and outstanding performance evaluations, SCCCD placed her on unpaid administrative leave in August 2022 and ultimately terminated her employment in June 2023.
Even more egregiously, the District reportedly failed to pay Dr. Bolen for extra classes and mandatory training sessions she completed under orders, violating Labor Code requirements for wage payments and accurate wage statements. When she requested a copy of her personnel file, SCCCD refused to provide it within the statutory deadline. During one notorious interactive process meeting, District consultant Rachel Shaw suggested Dr. Bolen “consider other jobs such as janitorial work,” an insult to a Black woman with two bachelor’s degrees, two master’s degrees, and a doctorate in education.
Dr. Bolen’s complaint raises twelve causes of action, including disability discrimination, retaliation, harassment, failure to accommodate, failure to engage in the interactive process, and medical‑leave harassment and retaliation under FEHA and the California Family Rights Act (CFRA). She also alleges wage theft, failure to provide accurate wage statements, waiting‑time penalties, and violations of Labor Code for withholding her personnel records.
At its core, Dr. Bolen’s lawsuit paints a portrait of an institution that values control over compassion and retribution over reason. Her experience mirrors the broader pattern of abuse at SCCCD under Chancellor Goldsmith’s regime, a culture that masks discrimination and hostility behind empty rhetoric of “kindness and grace.”
6. Double Standards
In the course of our research, we uncovered a striking example that sheds light on the blatant double standards at SCCCD, relevant to both the Tarazi and Bolen cases. Ms. Tabitha Villalba, who served as dean of the Humanities Division at FCC from 2018 to 2022, is known as one of Goldsmith’s favorites. She is named in the lawsuits filed by both Tarazi and Bolen and is referenced in previous sections. However, she has reportedly been teaching 100 percent online courses at FCC for years after departing Fresno. Villalba now lives and works in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
True to our investigative rigor, we pulled Villalba’s teaching schedule, which confirms she consistently teaches two fully online English courses every semester. [image below]
Her LinkedIn profile reveals her current residence in Tennessee and employment at Chattanooga State Community College, where she is the dean of Academic Success. [images below]
Her employment is also corroborated by the official Chattanooga State website. [image below]
This glaring example underscores how, under Chancellor Goldsmith’s leadership, proximity to her translates into vastly different treatment. The same regulations and policies that apply strictly to others—the ones she uses as the basis for employee terminations—are not just relaxed but at times entirely waived for those within Goldsmith’s inner circle, highlighting a culture of favoritism, cronyism, and corruption that undermines fairness and accountability at SCCCD.
7. A Word for Supporters
These lawsuits are only a glimpse into the ever-growing legal storm engulfing SCCCD, cases that have already pushed the District’s legal costs to more than $2.5 million a year. Each dollar spent by Goldsmith’s administration on attorneys defending retaliation and discrimination could have supported classrooms, tutoring programs, classified employees, or part‑time faculty healthcare.
Imagine what $2.5 million could have meant in real terms: hundreds of office hours restored, dozens of classified professionals hired, and student support programs strengthened. Instead, taxpayers are underwriting the cost of Goldsmith’s so‑called “kindness and grace.” It’s a leadership style built on intimidation, retaliation, deception, and corruption, now legally itemized and paid for with public funds.
While the Trustees remain silent, funding Goldsmith’s legal escapades and abetting her corruption, she continues to funnel District money into no‑bid consulting contracts for her family and friends and expand administrative overhead. Each dollar siphoned from the colleges weakens the very foundation of the institution she claims to lead.
We have previously shown, with documents and evidence, how these seven Trustees consistently fail to protect students, faculty, and classified professionals. It falls to us, faculty and classified professionals, the people who live the mission of this District every day, to make them care.
We have highlighted all the ways you can take action in our article, “Restoring Integrity to SCCCD: A Call to Action.” However, the most urgent items bear repeating:
The SCFT is currently designing a districtwide survey assessing District leadership and Board performance. Classified professionals should demand a parallel survey through CSEA to ensure their voices are heard.
While the MCC Academic Senate is acting on its members’ mandate to draft resolutions of no-confidence against Goldsmith and the elected Board, the Academic Senates at FCC, RC, and CCC have yet to move. Faculty of conscience at these colleges should go to their Senate meetings and demand that a discussion of these votes be taken up.
As faculty and classified professionals, we have the duty to act. We’ve said it before: our work, our investigations, and our voice exist only because you stand with us. If you withhold that voice, if silence becomes your response, then silence becomes the District’s permission to carry on. When your silence signals acceptance, it may also signal that we have overstayed our welcome. This is not a threat; it is a statement of truth. We cannot remain active if the majority of those directly harmed by this administration refuse to engage. Change will not come from above; it must come from within. For the bargaining units and Senates to act, their members must demand it. Complacency gives power to corruption.
Faculty and classified professionals, the ball is in your court.
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 - godmother Goldsmith - La Nina Goldsmith - Magdalena Gomez - Danielle Parra - Robert Fuentes - Austin Ewell - Deborah Ikeda - Nasreen Johnson - Destiny Rodriguez - Noel Reyes