Title IX at the Regents

When we posted about the upcoming Regents meeting, one item's detailed information was not available, a proposed change by the Governance Committee in rules regarding misconduct, especially the kind of sexual misconduct covered by Title IX.* After an inquiry, it was determined by yours truly that the missing item was not yet completed at that time. However, it is available now. By way of background, the new proposed policy was triggered by misconduct - sexual remarks to an employee by a Regent in his business operation - not part of any official Regental activity - for which that Regent eventually resigned. Some of the proposed language is below:

...For allegations of conduct in violation of the University’s [Sexual Violence and Sexual Harassment] SVSH policy, the Systemwide Title IX Officer will follow the processes in, apply the standards of, and afford the complainant and the respondent Regent the rights and procedures available under the SVSH Policy, including an equal opportunity to meet with the investigator, submit information, identify witnesses, respond to the evidence gathered, and have an advisor present during interviews and any related meetings. The Systemwide Title IX Officer will keep the three-member Regent panel mandated in Regents Policy 1112 informed throughout the process, consulting with them as necessary. If a conflict exists between Regents Policy 1112 and the SVSH Policy, the Systemwide Title IX Officer will apply the provisions of the SVSH Policy and may consult with the Regent panel as necessary when addressing such conflicts...

...Complaints of misconduct will fall within the scope of the policy if they relate to conduct by a Regent in their official capacity, or if a Regent’s non-official conduct is covered by, and could constitute a breach of, the SVSH Policy...

Source: https://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/regmeet/may20/g2.pdf

One aspect of the proposed policy is that it appears to apply to all Regents including the ex officio "political" members such as the governor. Yours truly could find no exemption for ex officio Regents.** And, since it applies to "non-official" conduct (conduct not directly related to Regental/UC business), it could potentially entangle the Regents and UC in some future allegations against an ex officio member that could have major political ramifications in the state. Would UC really want to be the key investigator in an allegation of sexual misconduct against, say, a sitting governor or speaker of the assembly? Unintended consequences of such entanglement are easy to imagine.
====
*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2020/05/preliminary-regents-agenda.html
====
**An earlier policy which still applies contains an exemption for the student regent and faculty and staff representatives to the board:

...This Policy applies only to the eighteen gubernatorial-appointed Regents, the ex-officio Regents, and any non-student Regents-designate. The Policy does not apply to the Student Regent or any faculty representative or staff advisors to the Regents...

Source: https://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/regmeet/may20/g2attach1.pdf