CU Board of Regents votes to censure Wanda James

Updated at 3:47 p.m. on Thursday, July 3, 2025.

University of Colorado regent Wanda James was censured Wednesday for comments she made about what she considered racial tropes that appeared in a campaign that educated people on the risks of cannabis use.

Regents voted 7-1 during an online meeting, with everyone but Regent Nolbert Chavez voting in favor of the censure. James abstained from the vote.  

She said she expected the outcome.

“This is a victory for me, because we have completely exposed the University of Colorado’s issues with race,” she said before the meeting. “We have been able to lay them bare for the world to see, and I could not be more proud of my community and the people who have stood with truth and stood against anti-Blackness.”

The Regents posted the censure on the board’s website.

It reads that James can still attend meetings and vote, but she would be removed “from all regent committee assignments, including regent committee leadership positions, and to preclude any such future assignments.” In addition, it states that the board would “rescind any invitations previously extended to Regent James to any internal or external university events that regents attend in their official representational capacity, and to preclude any such future invitations.”

James claimed nothing would change about her position.

“Nothing happens if I’m censured,” James said before the meeting. “Absolutely nothing. I remain a University of Colorado regent from the First Congressional District, with the support of the people who elected me, and absolutely nothing changes.” 

Hart Van Denburg/CPR News

The issue began when James, who also owns a cannabis dispensary, objected to illustrations that were a part of a CU Anschutz campaign that educated people on the risks of cannabis use called “The Tea on THC.” The images contained Black or dark-skinned males alongside language describing the effects of marijuana, such as laziness and poor school performance, which she considered derogatory to people of color.

She also communicated to the governor about funding for the campaign, suggesting the money be diverted to social equity programs. 

The images were quickly pulled from the campaign, and the funding she complained against was not interrupted. 

However, CU’s regents were concerned that she had a conflict of interest in making the comments, meaning she tried to have taxpayer money moved from the campaign to social equity programs because she felt her business might suffer due to the ad campaign, an allegation she’s consistently denied.

The meeting on Wednesday afternoon began with James making her case for 15 minutes. She spoke from Brother Jeff's Cultural Center in the Five Points neighborhood, surrounded by about a dozen supporters, her husband at her side. 

“Today is not about a censure. It is about censorship and retaliation,” she said. “I am being targeted for raising my voice for a campaign that dehumanized the Black community.” She said during a costly investigation, she was asked if she smoked cannabis on a daily basis, which she found disrespectful.

She said the governor had expressed opposition to funding three months before she had made a comment on it, making her public statements moot, her voice firm but emotional. “What I did do was call out the harm, publicly,” she said. “Truth-telling is not lobbying.” 

After her statement, regents had the opportunity to give their views. Regent-at-Large Elliott Hood was one of the speakers.

 Addressing James, he said, “I am glad the university was so quick to respond to your concerns ... but you chose to go further. You believed the program was spreading inaccurate information about cannabis. You continued to publicly attack the program. In a public statement, you called the program … dishonest. In news articles, you implied the program was based on faulty research.” 

He added: “Even if you believed the research findings were inaccurate, you cannot put your interests or the interests of your trade above the interests of the university you serve ... I find that you violated your fiduciary duty and I believe censure is warranted in this case.” 

The meeting wrapped up in less than a half hour, after the Board had met in private session for about thirty minutes. 

On June 13, regents voted 6-1, again with Chavez opposing, to continue the investigation, leading to Wednesday’s vote. It is only the second time a regent faced censure in the school’s history. In October 2022, regents voted unanimously to censure Glen Gallegos, from the Grand Junction area, because of having engaged in behavior seen as disparaging, disrespectful and threatening, particularly towards women.

James’ term on the board began in 2023 and will end in 2029. She is the first Black woman elected to the board in more than four decades. A first-generation graduate of CU Boulder, she served four years in the military and has worked at two Fortune 100 companies and now owns Simply Pure dispensary in Denver. 

After the June vote to proceed, James said, “This type of railroading happens all the time, and especially at this university. When you see something that is racist and you speak out about it, the message is clear. The message to Black leaders has never changed: ‘If you speak up, you will be punished. If you disrupt the status quo, you will be targeted.’”

Editor's note: This story has been updated to correct the vote tally. It has also been updated to clarify the cannabis campaign.