CSU chancellor Joseph Castro’s vanity, aversion to negative PR may cost him his job
.JPG "CSU Chancellor Dr. Joseph I. Castro returned to Fresno State to confer the degrees of the Classes of 2020 and 2021 at the university’s 109th/110th Commencement.")
At 5 a.m. on Oct. 21, 2020, a column I wrote about Fresno State axing wrestling and two other sports went online at fresnobee.com. It contained mild criticisms of outgoing President Joseph I. Castro, supported by background information about his ill-fated move to bring back the program during an economic recession.
At 9:26 a.m. a 140-word direct message from Castro popped up in my Twitter inbox. Castro framed his latest decision as “an impossible choice” and told me I had missed the real story.
“You will get to criticize a new Prez soon. Be well,” Castro’s message concluded.
One week earlier, Castro had been appointed chancellor of the California State University system. He departed for Long Beach in January 2021.
The reason I bring this up now, with Castro in the public, media and legislative crosshairs for his handling of sexual harassment claims against a campus administrator, as unearthed by USA Today, is because the message fairly and accurately represents my experience with Castro during his seven years at Fresno State.
It might perhaps even lend some insight as to why Castro didn’t display much bold leadership when presented with multiple allegations that Frank Lamas, the vice president for student affairs Castro personally recruited, was in fact a lascivious creep.
I wasn’t the only person in the newsroom to receive such messages from Castro; editors got them too. Many contained pedantic nitpicking, sometimes over word choice, and complaints about how stories were framed.
To me and others, Castro came across as thin-skinned. He did not take well to criticism, even the most tepid variety, and wanted news about Fresno State presented in a manner that reflected well on the university and especially his leadership. Which most did, let’s be honest.
But now, Castro’s vanity and serial aversion to negative publicity may prove his downfall.
Castro failed to take long view
After reading USA Today’s thorough investigation, it’s easy to conclude Castro (with advice from outgoing CSU Chancellor Timothy P. White) handed Lamas the sweetheart severance package and glowing recommendation in order to avoid a scandal that would taint his otherwise sterling tenure — and perhaps cost him a chance at jobs like the one he subsequently landed.
This was Castro’s biggest miscalculation. One he’ll probably rue for a long time.
The university’s Title IX department received at least a dozen complaints about Lamas over a six-year period, according to USA Today, including seven that reached Castro’s ears. Complaints that he stared at women’s breasts, touched them inappropriately, made sexist remarks and created a hostile work environment.
Had Castro followed his own “Be bold” mantra and taken forceful action against Lamas, there surely would have been a stink. Fresno State and Castro would have been made to endure a few weeks of negative headlines and answer tough questions.
However, none of that equates to a permanent stain. And in the long run, Castro would have been lauded for taking swift action and displaying strong leadership. Qualities that would qualify him for the position he currently holds to an even greater degree.
Castro would have been regarded as someone who doesn’t tolerate such shenanigans. The university president who protects students and staff from sexual harassment, even by senior administrators in his inner circle.
Unfortunately, Castro’s vanity didn’t allow for this sort of strategic thinking. The negative stain, even a temporary one, was too much for his ego to bear. So he opted to hide behind administrative hurdles and make the matter go away. Hopefully as quietly as possible.
Whoops.
Why was Castro afraid of lawsuit?
Even if Lamas responded by suing Fresno State, what was Castro so afraid of? If the case against the former vice president for student affairs is as strong as USA Today’s reporting would lead a reasonable person to believe, then surely the university would’ve prevailed in court. Not to mention the battle of public opinion.
It’s also difficult to buy the explanation, proffered by Fresno State Vice President for Administration and Finance Deborah Adishian-Astone, that Castro sought to avoid Lamas exercising a clause in his contract that allowed him to remain a faculty member if he no longer served in his VP role.
“In this matter, this was the last thing we wanted,” Adishian-Astone said in an interview with The Bee.
That doesn’t speak well of Castro and Adishian-Astone’s collective imaginations. Surely they could have reassigned Lamas to some auxiliary unit, or perhaps a broom closet on the edge of campus, where he’d soon be miserable enough to leave on his own.
You can’t make an omelette without first cracking open a few eggs. But again, Castro’s allergic reaction to any type of negative PR doesn’t allow for that sort of strategic thinking.
Which helps explain why what could have been a singular blemish on Castro’s otherwise highly successful tenure at Fresno State has blown up into a major scandal that could derail his career.
