In the weeks leading up to and following the University of Colorado Board of Regents’ vote to censure Regent Wanda James, calls online have been frequent and vehement, urging the board to reconsider.

James was censured July 2 for what the board ruled was a violation of regent policies including conflicts of interest, fiduciary obligations and rules of conduct for members of boards.

CU Regent Wanda James censured for conflict of interest at special meeting

This stems from recent actions by James, a marijuana dispensary owner, concerning her opinions of a campaign created by the state lawmakers and funded through the Colorado School of Public Health and the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus on the health risks of highly concentrated marijuana.

James, a Black woman, alleged that the initial imagery used throughout the campaign featured racist depictions of people of color and demanded that they be removed. While the images were removed shortly thereafter, she continued to comment on the campaign and suggested removing its funding.

CU regents request internal investigation for conflict of interest

Since the meeting, James has made statements through social media posts and local news outlets accusing the board’s actions toward her as racially and politically motivated, while other prominent figures have also weighed in.

In a series of posts on the social media site X, state Attorney General Phil Weiser suggested that the board overrode James’ First Amendment right to free expression through the censure.

“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 wrote. “Leaving this action in place not only raises questions of fairness, it undermines CD1’s representation on the Board.

“A lesson from this episode is that conflicts should be addressed through a commitment to de-escalating rhetoric, elevating listening, and working to find a mutual understanding.”

Following these tweets, James sent an email to her fellow regents along with university President Todd Saliman, pointing to recent support for her by Weiser, former Colorado House Speaker Terrance Carroll and U.S. Rep. Joe Neguse.

She also called for them to reverse their decision, suggesting that there could now be consequences.

“You are now endangering the University of Colorado in ways that are both reputationally catastrophic and legally indefensible,” James wrote. “This situation is no longer about me. It is about your collective failure to lead and your refusal to correct a grave mistake that is about to become a national scandal.”

Saliman was not available for comment by this story’s publication, but a CU spokesperson clarified that the president has no voting power or authority regarding board actions like a censure.

Board Vice Chair Ken Montera told The Gazette that this email was one of many directed at the regents in recent weeks with similar messaging.

“It’s been happening virtually daily,” he said. “There’s been no less than 50 [messages] in recent weeks.”

Montera said he was “shocked” to learn about Weiser’s tweets and reaffirmed the legal validity of the board’s investigations leading up to the censure vote.

He added that James has ignored the censure, continued to accuse the university system of systemic racism and has been unwilling to meet and come to an agreement with other regents.

James did not immediately respond to The Gazette’s attempt to contact her.

Montera said that, while it can’t reverse the censure itself, the board can restore James’ committee assignments, board leadership positions and access to university events. Such a resolution has not been presented and he said one likely wouldn’t anytime soon as long as James refuses to accept any sort of fault or responsibility.

He added that another meeting is planned in the near future to resolve the conflict, but he’s unsure if this will happen, given the lack of engagement thus far.

“This distraction has been really difficult for the board during one of the hardest times for higher education,” he said. “We’re losing funding and our job is to provide the best educational opportunities to the state of Colorado. That’s where our focus should be [right now].”

UCCS staff, faculty and students speak out on academic uncertainties