Editor’s Note: This article has been updated to reflect that Regent Wanda James never denied saying that money from the “Tea on THC” campaign should go to social equity businesses.
Conflict has escalated in the weeks after the University of Colorado Board of Regents censured Regent Wanda James as each side has refused to back down from their position and been unable to find common ground.
James maintains that she has done nothing wrong and, since her censure on July 2, has called the board “racist” and “anti-black” on her LinkedIn page — and on Facebook wrote that the board has “joined hands with the MAGA crowd and endangered Black voices.”
Board of Regents Chair Callie Rennison said the accusations of racism are unfounded.
“Those are completely ridiculous attempts to distract from the issue at hand, not dissimilar from tactics used by other prominent politicians,” Rennison said.
The Board of Regents is the elected body that oversees the CU system.
The board decided in a 7-1 vote July 2 to censure, or formally reprimand, James, saying she violated her fiduciary responsibilities under regent policy, which requires regents to reasonably act in the best interest of the university. The board determined, based on an independent investigation, that James advocated to defund a state-funded CU campaign about the risks of high-potency marijuana.
James disagrees about the reason she was censured, saying the board did it because they’re tired of her bringing up issues of racism.
“They want me silenced, and that’s exactly what they did,” James said.
The matter began in January when James, a marijuana dispensary owner, raised concerns about what she said were racially insensitive images used in an educational campaign called “The Tea on THC,” produced by the Colorado School of Public Health at CU’s Anschutz Medical Campus. She brought her concerns to CU President Todd Saliman and CU Anschutz Chancellor Don Elliman, who agreed the images were racist and had them removed within 24 hours. Public statements containing apologies from the campaign and the School of Public Health were issued within two days.
In the following days and months, James continued to speak publicly on social media, in emails and in news media interviews, discrediting the campaign and saying its funding from the state should be revoked.
“It is my goal that the funding for this group is pulled by the state,” James wrote on LinkedIn within days of becoming aware of the images. “I am working to make that happen.” According to an investigation report, she also posted on Instagram that she “will be … speaking with the governor about this.”
A Governor’s Office spokesperson, Ally Sullivan, said Gov. Jared Polis was skeptical of funding the “The Tea on THC” program long before James got involved. Polis had suggested cutting the campaign’s funding to the state’s Joint Budget Committee before and after James said the funding should be pulled.
“The Governor was not influenced by Regent James and has long been skeptical of the funding,” Sullivan wrote in an email to the Daily Camera. “He is mystified as to how CU could justify spending hundreds of thousands of dollars investigating a Regent that was just doing her job as an elected official.”
The censure is not because James flagged the racist images in the campaign, Rennison said, adding that James was right to do so. The censure, she said, came because James later advocated for funding to be taken away from the campaign.
“That is inappropriate for any regent to do, to advocate for defunding money away from CU,” Rennison said.
Regent Elliott Hood said the censure came because James baselessly attacked one of CU’s scientific research programs, tried to undermine the integrity of the research and advocated to defund that program.
“I think that’s highly problematic, especially at a time where science is under attack from certain corners of the government and funding for science is uncertain,” Hood said. Researchers “don’t need their elected leaders casting unfounded doubt on the integrity of their work.”
Regent and Board Vice Chair Ken Montera said a solution to the situation will likely require James to take some level of responsibility and an admission on her part that she acted inappropriately. Sanctions against James are in effect until the end of her term as regent in 2029, but they can be revised or removed before that if the board decides to do so.
“We acted as quickly as possible when Wanda expressed her concern (about the images), and I believe it’s completely inappropriate to advocate for the defunding of a legitimate, state-funded research program and to question the credibility of that research without any evidence or scientific backing,” Montera said.
Investigation report
In the spring, CU’s university counsel hired two law firms to conduct the independent investigation into James, intentionally seeking out one progressive-leaning firm and one conservative-leaning firm. The law firms worked together to interview 15 witnesses including James, gathered and reviewed documents including e-mails, text messages, social media posts and news articles, analyzed applicable regent policies and conducted legal research.
The total cost of the investigation as of June is $462,900, which includes James’ investigation and a separate investigation into Rennison, which cleared her of allegations that she had been paid full-time for part-time work at CU Denver. The investigation is being paid for by the CU system’s office of risk management.
The resulting investigation report provided a timeline of events and evidence that resulted from their investigation.
On Nov. 12, 2024, the report noted that the state’s Joint Budget Committee discussed cutting the “The Tea on THC” campaign by $1 million because of a need to balance budgets due to declining marijuana revenue projections. This occurs about a month before James is made aware of the campaign.
On Dec. 19, the Colorado School of Public Health announces the launch of its “Tea on THC” public awareness campaign. James becomes aware of the campaign and the images on Jan. 25, according to the report. On Jan. 26, James speaks with a representative from the Governor’s Office about the images and funding, where she’s told that the state is already considering cutting funding from the campaign for reasons unrelated to the images.
“While James is on the phone with the representative from the Governor’s office, she texts screenshots of the images to the Governor and asks if he has seen them,” according to the report. “The Governor replies that they are ‘awful.’ Per James, this is the only direct contact she has with the Governor about the Tea on THC campaign.”
James also contacts Saliman and Elliman on Jan. 26 and raises her concerns about the images. Later that day, a representative from the Colorado School of Public Health contacts Initium Health, the partner organization that helped develop the campaign, via text to remove the images and issue two apologies, one on behalf of the School of Public Health and one on behalf of Initium. The same day, Initium confirms it has removed the Instagram post with the images, and Initium removes the images from the campaign’s website either on this day or the next day, according to the report.
On Jan. 28, the School of Public Health posts an apology on its website and links to a statement from Initium also apologizing for the images, according to the report. Hours later, James takes to Instagram, calling the campaign “scientifically dishonest” and saying the data the campaign relies on has been “debunked by numerous doctors and numerous studies.” She adds that the state “should immediately revoke all funding associated with this reckless campaign.”
That same day, James sends an email to a group of people she calls “CU Black Leadership,” where she writes that she is “working with the governor’s office to pull funding from Anschutz” and “looking at having that money moved to the Cannabis Business Office, which provides grants and training for Social Equity Cannabis Businesses.”
Later, in her interview with the law firms, lawyers asked James about her statements in that email.
“In her interview, James stated that she was not working with the Governor’s office to pull funding from the University, despite saying she was doing that in this email,” the report read, adding that James elaborated to say that the Governor’s Office already pulled the money.
On Jan. 29, James is quoted in an article in the Green Market Report, a publication that reports on news in the cannabis industry, as saying she spoke with the governor and members of his team to look at pulling funding from the School of Public Health. In her interview with the law firms, James says she was misquoted by Green Market Report and says she only spoke to members of the governor’s team. She is paraphrased in a Westword article on Jan. 30 that she wants to see the entire campaign pulled, and the remaining funds directed to grants for marijuana business owners who qualify for social equity licenses. Those licenses are available to promote equitable cannabis business ownership. When asked by the university’s law firms if this was accurate, James responded, “I don’t know, maybe yes,” adding she always says in media interviews that money should go to social equity businesses, according to the report.
On Jan. 31, the Governor’s Office requests fully eliminating all $2 million in funding for the “Tea on THC” campaign.
On Feb. 27, James writes in an email to a group labeled “Black Trustees” that the campaign was “reinforcing harmful stereotypes rather than promoting legitimate, research-based education. That is why the $2 million in funding was pulled from Anschutz.”
On March 17, the Governor’s Office submits budget “comebacks,” again requesting to cut the $2 million that funds the Tea on THC campaign. On March 20, the Joint Budget Committee ultimately rejects proposed cuts to the School of Public Health, providing the full $2 million in funding.
Censure and sanctions
James told the Daily Camera on Wednesday that she still believes the “Tea on THC” campaign “is not science” and that “the funding should’ve been pulled.” She said she has a First Amendment right to say that and have an opinion on the matter.
“But did I lobby for that to happen? Absolutely not,” James said.
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser weighed in on the matter on July 13 when he posted on social media platform X that “to protect the right of free expression and the fair treatment of CU Regent James, the Board of Regents would do well to reconsider its action against her.” He said he was concerned about the sanctioning, adding that the First Amendment protects the right to free expression.
When asked if Weiser continues to stand by his July 13 statements, Attorney General’s Office Director of Communications Lawrence Pacheco said to refer to Weiser’s statement on X.
Hood said the censure doesn’t violate James’ free speech, a finding that was supported by the university’s legal counsel and the two law firms.
“While people are allowed to speak freely, we as a board are entitled to enforce our objective standards and expectations to all regents, including our fiduciary duties,” Hood said. “The right to free speech doesn’t shield someone from violating those standards, and it’s important that we enforce those standards consistently, regardless of the regent and without fear or favor.”
Other people and organizations have also backed James, including the Colorado Black Democrats and the Greater Metro Denver Ministerial Alliance. In addition to backing James, the Greater Metro Denver Ministerial Alliance called for the immediate resignation of Saliman. James said that demand has nothing to do with her and that she is not calling for Saliman’s resignation. The decision to censure can only be made by the Board of Regents. The board is a power above Saliman and oversees his employment.
Hood and Regent Ilana Spiegel said some of the online activity by James and her supporters has crossed a line. James has levied personal attacks against the two of them on Facebook, for example, posting on July 6 that they “chose to be antiBlack and stand with MAGA Republicans.” She also made comments prompting people to imagine if the images in the “Tea on THC” campaign were antisemitic, and tagged Spiegel, who is Jewish.
James also posted on Facebook that “we need to make sure that NO ONE continues to support Ilana Dubin Spiegel on her re-election campaign and anyone who is supporting her should be called out. …”
In response to those posts, Spiegel told the Daily Camera that “online harassment and intimidation, it’s never OK. I work really hard every day to remain focused on my family, my work I have to do every day and the work of being a regent.”
Spiegel said she wants people to know she and her colleagues remain committed to their work and responsibilities as regents.
“I remain committed to what I take very seriously, and that’s my work for students and families, the work we need to do to protect life-saving research and medical care, and continue to try to build a University of Colorado that reflects the diversity of the state,” she said.
Hood said that declining to censure James in this situation would signal to other regents that attacking and trying to defund CU’s research, whether it’s about cannabis or climate change, is acceptable.
“That is not a precedent that I am willing to set,” Hood said. “I take that very seriously.”
The regents have also enacted a series of sanctions against James as a result of the censure. They acted to remove James from all regent committee assignments, including regent committee leadership positions, and preclude any future assignments. She will not be allowed to attend university events as a regent, but she will still be able to attend regent meetings and be an active voting member of the board. For example, she can still attend CU Buffs football games but will no longer receive free tickets.
The sanctions against James are in effect until the end of her term as regent in 2029, but they can be revised or removed before that if the board decides to do so. Rennison said the board wants to find a solution and has held “countless” meetings and talks as a group and individually with James, both before the censure investigation and after it, but said James has been unwilling to compromise.
James has not admitted any wrongdoing and called for the board to apologize and remove the sanctions and censure. Rennison said the board is not willing to do so unless James takes some level of accountability, even if it’s an admission that she could’ve made better decisions.
“We have continued to attempt to find a place of peace, and it’s my opinion that that’s not what she’s interested in,” Rennison said. “That’s been frustrating.”
James refuted that and said it is “a complete lie” that the board has come to her to try to resolve the issue.
“It’s time to get back to work for the students,” James said. “It appears we have lost focus on why we were elected.”
In 2022, the Board of Regents censured Regent Glen Gallegos after the board found that he had repeatedly engaged in hostile and abusive verbal behavior toward women.
To view the investigation report and related documents, visit tinyurl.com/CURegentInvestigation.
