We, the CSUEU employees of the San Francisco Bay Region Network (SFBRN) at Cal State East Bay, San Francisco State University, and Sonoma State University, are calling for accountability, transparency, and an independent investigation into SFBRN’s leadership, governance, and transformation under Karen Moranski. As SFBRN’s leader, she has overseen its design and implementation while employees have experienced increased workloads, critical vacancies, loss of experienced staff, operational disruption, declining services, and declining confidence in her leadership. Employees have expressed concerns about challenging or disagreeing with Karen Moranski because of potential career consequences. We are asking for an independent review of her decisions, leadership, and continued authority within SFBRN.

Why Employees Have Lost Confidence

1. Staffing reductions are being treated as transformation and "efficiency."

Employees are increasingly performing work across multiple campuses while critical positions remain vacant. As experienced employees retire or resign, their responsibilities are being absorbed by remaining staff. Karen Moranski has stated in town halls that several vacant positions will not be back filled and has presented the decision not to replace departing employees as part of SFBRN's efficiency strategy. This raises a fundamental question for the CSU Trustees and Chancellor Mildred Garcia, are these savings the result of genuine operational improvements, or simply workforce reductions achieved through attrition and increased workloads for remaining employees? If leaving positions vacant and redistributing their work is a central component of the efficiency model, Karen Moranski should be held accountable for the resulting increased workloads, decline in campus services, and operational consequences.

2. Employees are being required to absorb substantially expanded responsibilities across three campuses without compensation, while MPPs have received increased compensation.

Karen Moranski has stated in town halls that union employees should not expect raises because taking on additional work is part of SFBRN’s effort to achieve “efficiencies,” emphasizing that employees are still working no more than 40 hours per week. At the same time, Karen Moranski and several MPPs have received raises or increased compensation associated with their move into SFBRN. This raises concerns about whether the burden and benefits of SFBRN’s claimed efficiencies are being distributed equitably.

The CSU Trustees and Chancellor Mildred Garcia should conduct an independent audit of management compensation changes associated with the creation and implementation of SFBRN. The audit should examine how compensation decisions were made, who received increases, whether compensation practices have been applied equitably to management and union employees, and whether Karen Moranski’s relationships or influence at Sonoma State played any role in those decisions. Union employees should not be expected to generate organizational savings by absorbing expanded responsibilities without compensation while management receives increased compensation.

3, Approximately $10 million has been committed by Chancellor Mildred Garcia to SFBRN, yet campuses have not seen measurable evidence that this investment is producing efficiencies.

A significant portion of this funding has been "directed" to Deloitte for transformation services. However, employees in departments that transitioned into SFBRN describe receiving generic, low-value, AI-generated deliverables from Deloitte that provide no evidence of meaningful operational improvement or efficiencies across the three campuses. At the same time, employees report increasing workloads and vacancies, while campuses have experienced declining services and operational problems following the transition of departments into SFBRN. This raises a fundamental question, what measurable improvements and efficiencies have resulted from the approximately $10 million investment, and how are those improvements being demonstrated?

The CSU Trustees should require Karen Moranski and Jeff Wilson to provide transparent, independently verifiable evidence supporting SFBRN’s claimed savings and operational improvements, without relying on Deloitte’s assessments or "consultant presentations". This evidence should clearly distinguish genuine operational efficiencies from savings resulting from vacancies, employee attrition, position eliminations, and hiring restrictions. They should demonstrate, with measurable data, that SFBRN is actually delivering the efficiencies and service improvements used to justify this substantial investment by the Chancellor.

4. The Dismantling of the Original SFBRN Leadership Structure and Expansion of Administrative Overhead Must Be Independently Investigated.

SFBRN was originally designed around a single Network Chief Executive and Financial Officer, with Jeff Wilson appointed to lead the Network. As part of the consolidation, the CFO positions at Cal State East Bay and Sonoma State University were eliminated, with the stated expectation that consolidating leadership and financial functions would reduce duplication and generate approximately $700,000 in annual savings. Questions have since been raised regarding Karen Moranski’s role in Jeff Wilson’s removal from the Network CEO/CFO leadership position and positioning herself as the central leader of SFBRN.

These circumstances warrant independent review, particularly given the creation and retention of multiple highly compensated administrative positions. Cal State East Bay and Sonoma State were in the process of creating “Campus Financial Officer” CFO positions, while SFBRN created a Network COO position with compensation of approximately $300,000 and retained a search firm for the recruitment. At Sonoma State, the former AVP of Human Resources position was re-titled “Executive HR Advisor,” reduced from overseeing the entire HR department to having only one direct report, while retaining the AVP HR compensation. Information shared within HR indicates that San Francisco State and Cal State East Bay are also creating Executive HR Advisor positions. Karen Moranski has also created a Senior Director of Learning & Professional Development position within her “Office of Mis-Transformation,” with compensation exceeding $170,000, despite two of the three campuses already having Learning & Professional Development staff within their HR departments.

The CSU Trustees and Chancellor Mildred Garcia should independently investigate the restructuring of SFBRN’s original leadership model, including Karen Moranski’s role in Jeff Wilson’s removal and whether personal or professional relationships influenced staffing, compensation, or organizational decisions. The investigation should provide a transparent accounting of positions eliminated, created, or re-titled, including compensation, reporting structures, and the resulting net financial impact. It should determine whether SFBRN has actually achieved the promised savings and reduced administrative duplication, or whether administrative costs have instead increased while front-line union vacancies remain unfilled.

5. The Deloitte engagement and whether SFBRN’s transformation has become a “mis-transformation” must be investigated. 

Karen Moranski served as the primary liaison between Deloitte and the departments transitioned into SFBRN and was closely involved in the transformation work Deloitte was hired to support. Employees have questioned the value of Deloitte’s generic, low-value, and AI-generated deliverables, including organizational structures and position descriptions. Employees are aware that AI was used, and Deloitte consultants themselves have acknowledged its use. The central question is whether Deloitte’s work provided value commensurate with the millions of dollars spent and contributed to a “mis-transformation” across the three campuses.

The CSU Trustees and Chancellor Mildred Garcia should independently review Deloitte’s contracts, statements of work, invoices, billing rates, consultant qualifications, AI-produced deliverables, and measurable results, including whether consultants with no prior hands-on experience in HR, Finance, IT, Procurement, or other relevant functions were appropriately qualified to advise on a major CSU organizational transformation. The review should also examine Karen Moranski’s oversight and management of the Deloitte engagement and her responsibility for the direction and implementation of the transformation.

6. SFBRN has been promoted as a success while the three campuses report fundamental operational problems.

Employees have repeatedly heard Karen Moranski and the “Office of Mis-Transformation” describe SFBRN as a successful transformation, yet departments within SFBRN report continued vacancies, increased workloads, and loss of experienced employees, while faculty and staff across the three campuses report declining service levels and significant operational problems. For example, HR teams across the three campuses have been merged, yet business processes remain unconsolidated. Faculty and staff report that HR response times are abysmal, with basic requests such as hiring, raises, reclassification's, and other HR matters taking months to receive a response, if they hear back at all. CHRS is creating significant usability problems for employees, and P2P remains inconsistent and difficult to use, disrupting campus operations. These ongoing problems raise serious questions about whether SFBRN is delivering the promised transformation and efficiencies.

When employees and campuses raise concerns about staffing, workload, and operational problems, those concerns should be addressed with specific facts, measurable outcomes, and meaningful solutions, not general statements from Karen Moranski that changes were made for “campus efficiency” or "campus viability", or AI-generated “Network Mindset” messaging that SFBRN employees openly scoff at. Employees and campuses deserve direct answers about how SFBRN departments are contributing to the poor services they are receiving. As the executive responsible for directing the transformation, Karen Moranski should be held accountable by the CSU Trustees and Chancellor Mildred Garcia for this mis-transformation.

7. Karen Moranski’s Role in Sidelining Jeff Wilson Must Ne Investigated.

Jeff Wilson was appointed as SFBRN’s Network Chief Executive and Financial Officer and was responsible for providing leadership, direction, and accountability for the newly consolidated Network. However, SFBRN employees experienced limited visibility and engagement from Jeff Wilson, while Karen Moranski became the central figure directing, communicating, and implementing the transformation. The circumstances surrounding this apparent shift in authority require independent investigation. The CSU Trustees and Chancellor Mildred Garcia should determine whether Karen Moranski assumed substantial authority over the SFBRN transformation that had originally been assigned to Wilson, how that authority was obtained, who authorized it, and whether Wilson was effectively sidelined from meaningful authority while remaining the formally designated Network CEO/CFO.

The investigation should also examine whether Karen Moranski influenced or directed decisions that reduced Wilson’s responsibilities, involvement in decision-making, or ability to exercise effective oversight of the Network. If Karen Moranski effectively displaced the Network CEO/CFO, the CSU Trustees should determine who authorized that change, why it occurred, whether it was consistent with SFBRN’s original governance model, and whether the shift in authority contributed to the operational, financial, and organizational problems now being experienced across the three campuses.

8. Prior Leadership History and Qualifications Should Have Been Considered Before Placing an Administrator at the Center of SFBRN.

On April 3, 2025, the Sonoma State Academic Senate approved a resolution calling for a referendum of no confidence in Chancellor Mildred García, Interim President Emily Cutrer, and Provost Karen Moranski. The subsequent faculty referendum resulted in an overwhelming vote of no confidence in all three administrators. This was a formal action through Sonoma State’s academic governance process and raised significant concerns about Karen Moranski’s leadership before she was placed at the center of a major three-campus transformation. The Presidents of Cal State East Bay, San Francisco State University, and Sonoma State University should explain what consideration, if any, was given to the concerns raised by Sonoma State faculty before Karen Moranski was appointed as the Vice President of Regional Transformation. They should also explain what relevant experience and qualifications she possessed to lead the consolidation of highly complex HR, Finance, IT, and Procurement functions across three universities, particularly given that her prior role was in Academic Affairs.

The CSU Trustees should independently review what the three CSU Presidents knew about the concerns surrounding Karen Moranski’s leadership, when those concerns became known, who evaluated her qualifications and suitability for the VP Network Transformation role, and why they concluded that she was appropriate to lead the largest transformation effort undertaken by the CSU, involving three universities, thousands of employees, and critical campus services.

What We Demand

We call upon the Governor of California, CSU Trustees, Chancellor, the three CSU Presidents, and CSUEU to:

1. Conduct a formal vote of no confidence in Karen Moranski’s leadership. 
2. Conduct an independent financial and operational audit of SFBRN, including the approximately $10 million investment, claimed savings and efficiencies, staffing reductions, MPP compensation changes, administrative restructuring, newly created or retitled positions, and the resulting net financial impact.
3. Conduct an independent investigation of the Deloitte engagement, including contracts, expenditures, invoices, consultant qualifications, AI-generated deliverables, oversight, and measurable value provided to the three campuses.
4. Conduct confidential employee interviews without Karen Moranski or her direct reports to independently assess staffing, workload, compensation, leadership, and operational disruptions.
5. Suspend the recruitment of the COO and other executive positions within SFBRN until the independent review is completed.
6. Publicly release the findings and recommendations of the independent investigations and audits so employees, the campuses, and taxpayers can evaluate whether SFBRN has achieved its stated objectives.

We ask the CSU Trustees to conduct an independent and transparent investigation of the concerns raised in this petition, and ensure that SFBRN is evaluated based on objective, verifiable outcomes, not unsupported claims of efficiency or transformation by Karen Moranski.