IN CSU SCANDAL, CRUCIAL QUESTIONS REMAIN

Nine years ago, the University of California released a systemwide plan meant to reduce sexual misconduct and harassment. Six years ago, the #MeToo movement led the state Legislature, which was facing harassment scandals of its own, to pass a series of laws to protect victims and hold aggressors responsible. Now, the leaders of the giant California State University system face their own reckoning.

A Los Angeles Times analysis of CSU records from the system’s 23 campuses from the 2021-22 school year determined that official investigations were only completed in about 3 percent of more than 2,600 reports of sexual misconduct and harassment. An outside report released Wednesday by the law firm Cozen O’Connor found that the CSU chancellor’s office does not undertake the most basic steps to identify problems: tracking sexual misconduct and harassment cases systemwide to see if they’re been properly investigated and resolved. Unsurprisingly, the law firm found that many of the 18,000 CSU students and employees it surveyed had little trust reports would be properly handled.

Embarrassingly enough, CSU trustees’ decision last year to seek an outside probe came after revelations that the system’s top official — Chancellor Joseph I. Castro — had grossly mishandled allegations of sexual misconduct by a campus vice president in 2020 when he was president of Fresno State, quietly approving a $260,000 payout to the official and providing him with an effusive letter of recommendation. Castro resigned after the scandal hit.

This week, allegations emerged of a cover-up in a case involving Cal State Fullerton President Framroze “Fram” Virjee, who is retiring this summer after never being formally investigated over repeated complaints that he had inappropriately touched students, beginning in 2019.

CSU trustees — including Lt. Gov. and 2026 gubernatorial candidate Eleni Kounalakis — have expressed shock and alarm at the developments and vowed sweeping change. This is a proper response, but concrete steps are needed. More of Cozen O’Connor’s findings are expected to be released in June — including on San Diego State University. Alarm had better turn into action then.

Here is one crucial question: Did CSU’s awful record on investigating misconduct allegations stem from poor management and record-keeping — or did CSU believe a cover-up was in the system’s best interest, to protect its reputation and to limit legal exposure? The question isn’t, “Should they have known better?” It’s, “Who knew what when?”