Fresno State, CSU leaders offer conflicting statements; motion in harassment trial denied

After weighing conflicting sworn statements from two top administrators in the California State University system, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge denied a motion to quash a trial subpoena issued to former interim chancellor Jolene Koester in a harassment and retaliation lawsuit brought by a Fresno State employee.

The conflicting statements are from Koester and Fresno State president Saúl Jiménez-Sandoval.

The lawsuit was filed in December 2022 by Terrance Wilson, a former analyst in the Fresno State Student Affairs department. He alleges that he was subjected to years of harassment by former Fresno State vice president of student affairs Frank Lamas.

Wilson also alleges that the university locked him out of campus buildings and removed him from the campus directory in retaliation for participating in a February 2022 investigation published by USA Today. That report detailed the failure of the university and former CSU chancellor and Fresno State president Joseph I. Castro to properly investigate or hold Lamas accountable for multiple harassment allegations.

At issue in the motion was whether Koester should have to testify at trial. The former interim chancellor, who is now retired, said in a sworn declaration in support of the motion by CSU attorneys that she did not have any relevant knowledge related to the treatment of Wilson. But Judge Steven A. Ellis, citing deposition testimony given by Jiménez-Sandoval, denied the motion to quash the trial subpoena and found Koester has “highly relevant personal knowledge relating to the claims and defenses that may be presented at trial.”

“The university wants to shield various of its principal players from testimony, and the whole problem and the reason we’re in a trial is because principal players at the university did not take action they should have taken for several years,” said attorney Stephen Hammers, who is representing the plaintiff in the case. “It is the very act of avoidance that is the reason we are in this trial, and the court is not letting former chancellor Koester avoid her testimony.”

A trial, scheduled to start on Oct. 20, has been pushed to April due to Castro’s death. The former CSU chancellor and Fresno State president passed away in August.

Kenneth Jones and Dana Silva from the Los Angeles law firm Saul Ewing, who are representing the CSU, did not respond to a request for comment by email or left on voicemail.

Koester served as interim chancellor from May 2022 through September 2023, after Castro resigned under fire related to his handling of various harassment complaints while he was president at Fresno State.

In the sworn declaration, Koester denied any involvement in the decision to restrict the Wilson’s security card access or to remove him from the campus directory.

Koester also said she had no input in the creation or objectives of a Fresno State task force formed by Jiménez-Sandoval in April 2022 to assess campus Title IX and Discrimination, Retaliation and Harassment departments. The task force released its final report in February 2023.

Jiménez-Sandoval, however, testified in a deposition late last year that the university’s task force was a “collaborative effort” with the chancellor’s office, according to court documents.

In his deposition, Jiménez-Sandoval was asked, “And so what collaboration did you pursue with the chancellor’s office when you put together your task force?”

The Fresno State president responded: “The chancellor’s office provided Cozen O’Connor, and the chancellor’s office provided people from the chancellor’s office to be in the task force as well.”

Jiménez-Sandoval was asked, “Who was the chancellor at that time?”

He responded, “Koester.”

He was asked, ‘Jolene Koester?’

He answered: “Yes.”

The law firm Cozen O’Connor at that time was conducting a systemwide assessment of CSU programs to address Title IX and Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation.

The formation of the Fresno State task force was announced in April 2022, but according to its final report it did not receive its charge from Jiménez-Sandoval until early May 2022 and did not begin to meet in earnest until the end of the spring semester later that month.

Koester was announced as interim chancellor in March and assumed the role on May 1.

Jiménez-Sandoval in deposition also said the chancellor’s office played perhaps the key role in reversing the actions taken against Wilson, including his lockout from university buildings and removal from the campus directory. Access was reinstated in April, but the university did not restore Wilson to the campus directory for another two years, according to court documents.

The Fresno State president, according to a portion of the deposition transcript included in court documents, was asked, “So the chancellor’s office corrected the situation?”

Jiménez-Sandoval said: “I think ultimately that’s what happened, yes.”

Koester, Hammers told The Bee, had taken office at perhaps the most turbulent time in CSU history and that any reasonable person would expect the issues that toppled Castro and impacted other campuses in the CSU, the largest 4-year public university system in the country, to be front and center.

The CSU board of trustees at the time Koester became interim chancellor was investigating Fresno State and its handling of the sexual harassment allegations against Lamas. It also in March 2022 engaged Cozen O’Connor to conduct a systemwide assessment of Title IX and Discrimination Retaliation and Harassment on its 23 campuses and the chancellor’s office. The California State Auditor in June 2022 also started an investigation into the handling of sexual harassment allegations by the CSU and three of its campuses including Fresno State.

All three completed their work while Koester was serving as interim chancellor.

Wilson, the plaintiff, is serving as vice president of finance for the California State University Employee’s Union while on leave from the university. Fresno State pays his salary, but is reimbursed by the union.

The CSU chancellor’s office in September 2022, while Koester was serving as interim chancellor, also issued a press release that said Castro had “interfered with an effective response to the misconduct of Lamas by failing to respond vigorously” to a number of complaints of misconduct by Lamas in his six years on campus.

Ellis, the judge, wrote: “The Court finds that plaintiff has made a sufficient record that Dr. Koester has highly relevant personal knowledge relating to the claims and defenses that may be presented at trial and there is no less intrusive means available to obtain that information for use at trial.

“As interim chancellor, (Koester) and others she worked with closely in the chancellor’s office received reports of what may be considered a systemic failure at Fresno State, as the campus president is reported to have himself failed to address harassment and retaliation and instead is reported to have protected those who harassed and retaliated.

“The chancellor’s office, while Dr. Koester was interim chancellor, was involved in an effort to investigate and remedy these failures at Fresno State. If Dr. Koester was personally involved, her personal knowledge and involvement may be relevant and admissible at trial. If Dr. Koester was not personally involved – and either was not informed of the events at issue or was informed and decided to delegate the responsibility of addressing this issue to others – that lack of personal involvement may also be relevant and admissible at trial.”

The motion, Ellis wrote, is denied.