A CU Regent’s opposition to now-discontinued illustrations in an anti-marijuana ad campaign CU Anschutz was promoting seemed innocent enough.
A Black woman, Regent Wanda L. James, was offended by the visuals of what appeared to be a Black or dark-skinned male experiencing the negative impacts of marijuana usage as his age progressed over time.
So she denounced the images and suggested that the funding for the campaign be re-directed, and she called Gov. Jared Polis to let him know her views.
Things quickly got more complicated. That’s because James is not only a regent but also the owner of a marijuana dispensary. So when funding was in fact redirected, concerns were raised that James opposed the campaign because it could harm her business, and now she faces possible censure by the Board of Regents.
Since the controversy began, Black professionals from across the state have been coming to James’ defense, including legislators and educators. James calls the hullabaloo “a bunch of BS tactics,” she said in an interview on Monday, “to attempt to end a Black voice in Colorado,” using slightly spicier language.
In another interview, she said, “The whole thing is amazingly shocking.” She described the probe as “nothing more than a smear campaign to muddy up my name and to intimidate me and to retaliate towards me for doing nothing more than calling out CU Anschutz Public School of Health for the racist tropes that they put in their Tea on THC campaign!”
The 11-page memo quotes from the regents’ conflict of interest policy: “A regent serves the public trust and exercise their powers and duties in the interest of the public, the university, and the board. A regent’s independent judgment in the discharge of board responsibilities must not be impaired as a result of conflicts between interests of the university and the regent’s own financial interest or personal interest …”
The beginning
The kerfuffle began as a reaction to an ad campaign for CU Anschutz called the Tea On THC. On Dec. 19, 2024, CU Anschutz posted a press release entitled “Colorado School of Public Health Launches a New Awareness Campaign Educating Coloradans on the Risks of High Concentration Cannabis.”
The release states: “In 2021, the Colorado School of Public Health received funding from the State of Colorado to research the possible physical and mental health effects of high potency THC. Their research began with a review of more than 60,000 publications and studies from across the country to determine how and to what extent the topic has been studied and to survey challenges communities face. This robust review culminated in the first phase of the educational campaign prioritizing youth and pregnant or nursing mothers, whom can be most impacted by the effects of high-concentration cannabis.”
The campaign included images to which James objected. They are of a dark brown-skinned person at ages that increase from one panel to the next, showing how brain development is impacted by marijuana use at different developmental states.
The first image is a baby in utero, under which the caption reads: “Impaired mental development;” the next image is of a dark brown-skinned male, now appearing child-aged with the caption: “Lower scores in verbal reasoning and memory;” the next panel is of a dark brown skinned six-year-old with the caption: “Language deficits, impulsivity, and behavior changes;” the next panel is of a 13-to 16-year-old person, still with dark brown skin and the caption: “Lower attention, achievement, and substance use.”
On her LinkedIn page, James, who owns Simply Pure, a dispensary in Denver, describes herself as a regent, a dispensary owner, and a “Professional Speaker on Pot, Power, Politics, and Education” and a former naval officer. There, she shared concerns about the campaign:
“I am outraged to bring to your attention a blatantly racist and deeply harmful campaign funded and promoted by the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus of Public Health, which weaponizes Black babies, Black boys, and Black men to push the false and dangerous narrative that cannabis use stunts brain development and cognitive ability and uses the Black community to make its point.”
She called the campaign “an intentional and calculated attack on Blackness” that “deliberately exploits Black bodies while completely ignoring the fact that cannabis use is disproportionately higher among white Coloradans simply due to population demographics. Where are the images of white cannabis users?”
The Reaction
According to a CU Anschutz spokesperson, the images were immediately removed.
“The campaign, Tea on THC, has not been suspended and will run through the end of June as planned,” said David Kelly, Senior Director of Media Relations with the Office of Communications at University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus in a March 7, 2025 email. “What did occur is the removal of some of the images used in the campaign. This occurred after Regent James raised concerns about specific images with university leadership on Jan. 26. The images she highlighted were removed the following day.”
But that was not the end of it, and what happened next depends on whom you ask: Regents think she wanted funding stopped because the campaign harmed her business and that by raising her concerns with Gov. Jared Polis, she had some hand in the funding stoppage.
Hart Van Denburg/CPR NewsThe University of Colorado Hospital on the Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora.
James said she had nothing to do with the change in funding to the campaign – which did get recommended for reduction.
In a memo to the Joint Budget Committee from Mark Ferrandino dated January 31, 2025, recommended changes to the funding were included.
It states that “This program was initially funded … with $4 million appropriation … and $1 million in the following two fiscal years.”
The memo states: “Instead of sunsetting, this program’s funding was continued with a $2 million annual appropriation from the [Marijuana Tax Cash Fund].” In the next paragraph, the memo states, “The Governor’s November 1st budget originally proposed to reduce this appropriation by $1 million. With significant previous funding being allocated to this program, as well as the challenging balancing outlook for the MTCF, this budget update proposed to fully eliminate the MTCF appropriation for this program in FY 2025-2026.”
The memo also states that CSU-Pueblo has a similar research study in process, making CU Anschutz’s program redundant. “The elimination of this appropriation will provide a total of $2 million of MTCF savings annually to meet other needs for the fund,” the memo states.
James said a comment she made to a reporter pertaining to her thoughts about how the money could be better spent would have no bearing on how the state set, or resets its budget. She was interviewed by two publications: Westword and the Green Report.
In the latter, in a story published in January, she said: “I want the IG taken down, and I want the website taken down. I also had a conversation yesterday with … the governor and members of the governor’s team, and we’re looking at pulling funding (from the Colorado School of Public Health for this,” she said, according to the article.
Comments she’s made to media outlets would not affect budget decisions, she said. “It has nothing to do with me,” she said of the redistribution of funds, during a Google Meet interview on Monday. “I do not have anything to do with the budgeting office; I do not work for the state of Colorado.”
The regents’ Point of View
Two regents interviewed together for this story view things differently. Callie Rennison is a faculty emerita from CU Denver and the chair of the University of Colorado Board of Regents. Ken Montera, who came to CU from private industry, is the vice chair. They both raised concerns that there could be an appearance of James having a conflict of interest because James serves as both a dispensary owner and opponent to the funding.
After the stories in the media appeared, Rennison said, people started contacting James’ colleagues.
“That’s when people on campuses and in the public started contacting many of the regents, having concerns,” Rennison. “Now, some people talked about how they felt it was a conflict of interest. Some people were very disturbed by what they saw as an attack on academic freedom by the research at Anschutz,” Rennison said.
Montera added: “I think one of the things that was a concern from some of the people that I heard from wasn’t necessarily just removing the imagery – it was the request to remove the entire research and project. And that’s where people were questioning: this is getting into academic freedom.”
Ken MonteraKen Montera is Vice Chair of the University of Colorado Board of Regents.
Dave Vaughan DVision productionsCallie Rennison of the University of Colorado Board of Regents
He added that he considered the budget decision a cause-and-effect response.
“From what I understand, she called up the governor’s office, asked them to defund it – and that was by her statements – and then a day or two later, the JBC received a letter from the . . . head of the budgeting process,” he said.
Rennison and Montera passed the concerns they were hearing along to Jeremy Hueth, vice president, university counsel and secretary of the Board of Regents. Hueth responded on February 28 with an 11-page memo addressed to them which asks if there are existing applicable current laws or policies for this circumstance.
The Memo
The memo also quotes from the “Conflicts of Interest Policy,” which in part states: “A regent’s independent judgment in the discharge of board responsibilities must not be impaired as a result of conflicts between the interests of the university and the regent’s own financial interest or personal interest … ”
The memo points out that questions are raised by James’ public and private comments and “direct advocacy with state officials to pull funding” from a program “that is directly related to her business and financial interests.”
Chloe Aiello/DenveriteSimply Pure Dispensary in Highlands.
The memo also states that the only remedy to her comments is “Censure.” It adds that “It may also be beneficial to consult with an independent third party, such as the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission, to offer additional guidance about the application of Colorado ethics statutes to the circumstances outlined above.”
James said the accusations are intended to harm her.
“Now they’re trying to say that because I’m an elected official, that somehow or another, I have all of this power over the governor, which is the craziest thing ever,” she said.
To sum up her thoughts, she doesn’t deny having had a conversation with the Governor on the subject, but added that she’s not involved with the decisions made because of her expressing their views: “I mean, if they think that I’m that ‘bad’ of a woman, that I can just run around here changing the governor’s mind on budget stuff … Wow.”
As the potential for censure hangs in the balance ahead of the next Regents’ meeting on April 10 and 11, to be held for full days at CU Denver, James has requested community members come speak for two minutes each during the public comments section.
Support for James
Already, there has been a groundswell of support for James, who is also the target of the Shame on Wanda James website, which states in part: “Wanda James similarly appears to be leveraging her regent position to protect her dispensary’s interests, challenging a public health program that might hurt the cannabis industry’s image. Like Trump or Musk, she stands accused of turning a public platform into self-promotion.”
Community groups coming to James’ defense include legislators and educators. Last Tuesday, The Colorado Black Democratic Legislative Caucus wrote a statement supporting James, stating that it “stand[s] in full support of University of Colorado Regent Wanda James.” It added that it’s outraged by the attacks against her, which it describes as “unfounded.”
Maddie Malhotra/Courtesy: WandaFILE, Wanda James, owner of Simply Pure Denver Dispensary Dec. 24, 2021.
“These attacks should have been immediately rejected by the CU Board of Regents. In a move that reeks of complicity, the CU Board of Regents has chosen to escalate a Republican-led smear campaign … ”
“It adds: Regent James is being targeted for doing what any responsible leader should do, standing against racism and racist imagery. She publicly called out the racist, harmful messaging produced by CU Anschutz School of Public Health, in a campaign that used cannabis tax dollars to push outdated, offensive imagery and tropes about Black communities. This smacks of a concerted effort to silence and discredit a Black elected official who called out blatant racist images in a publication targeting our Black community and widely distributed.”
This week, the support continued when the Colorado Black Caucus of School Board Directors weighed in. The group represents 17 Black current and former school board members in eight different districts.
“We write today to unequivocally condemn the Board’s politically motivated and racist attack against Regent Wanda L. James, a distinguished member of our caucus and a lifelong advocate for justice, equity, and educational excellence,” an email states.
“Let us be clear: this is not about ethics, conflicts of interest, or academic integrity. This is about punishing a Black woman for speaking up for Black children, Black families, and Black businesses. This is a dangerous and disgraceful attempt to silence a leader who has worked tirelessly to hold institutions accountable for the harm they continue to inflict upon communities of color.”
Wanda James, who owns a dispensary, spoke out against a CU Anschutz anti-marijuana campaign she considered racist. Read More
