Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
A very important saga that is out of the University
of Colorado, which I don't think has gotten nearly enough attention,
certainly in terms of giving out the facts and the
reality of what has in fact been going on with
the story of the censure and sanctions of Wanda James,
(00:24):
the CB one first Congressional District Regent for the University
of Colorado. Of course, there's a eight member, nine member
board of Regents, eight elected for each congressional district one
at large, and Wanda James had, going back to late January,
begun a crusade to defund entirely a public health awareness
(00:50):
program to educate kids and pregnant mothers, in particular on
the risks of high potency th that central ingredient in marijuana.
Wanda James, in addition to being a CU regent, is
a prominent marijuana shop owner. In fact, her claim to
(01:14):
fame in that regard is that she owns the first
black owned legal marijuana dispensary, and that was a big
thing when she ran for CU regent and when this
campaign was out there, put out by the Colorado School
of Public Health, which is at three universities, but particularly here,
the University of Colorado. She claimed that their t on
(01:38):
THHC program, done by the School of Public Health and
Nishim Health, a public benefit corporation, that what they had
put out in images, these medical illustrations of children in
utero and older, were racist because they were of black children.
(02:02):
Never mind that there were white children in identical images
as well. But she decreed that it was racist and
made a protest and they were taken down within like
forty eight hours. Those images were taken down, but she
continued to persist in trying to defund the program and
got in contact with her friends at the Governor's office
(02:22):
to try and make this happen. Ultimately, she was censured
by her colleagues in a by partisan vote after an
investigation that was initiated in a bi partisan way by
my two guests here on KOA. I am joined by
Cali Renaissan, the chair of the CU Board of Regents,
a Democrat from Boulder, and Ken Monterra, the Vice chair
(02:44):
of the CU Board of Regents hailing from Colorado Springs,
a Republican. They both joined me now in the kind
of bipartisan fashion, I think folks will start to expect
more of and more of out of the CU Board
of Regents. Welcome regions. Thank you both so much for
joining me.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Thank you very strue ready to be here.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
I would welcome the chance to start with you. Regent
Chair Renaissan, how do you look at what has evolved
over time? Because not only had Wanda James, your colleague,
accused this program of being racist even after the images
were taken down, but there have been accusations lobbed against
(03:26):
all of you who voted in a majority vote and
a bipartisan fashion two centsurre and sanction region James saying
that what you all did in that was racist. How
do you respond and what do you look at this
vote in terms of its implications and the message sent.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
I think several things. One, what we did was the
best for CU. We're upholding our oaths, and we're following
through and holding people accountable who break our policies, just
as we would for a student staff or faculty member.
It's part of our job as a self governing board.
I think the continued, continued behaviors that we've seen in
(04:05):
actions are in an unfortunate distraction. They've burned a lot
of time, a lot of people's time, which at this
day and age, we don't really we need that time
to do other things. I'm happy to say the board
continues to work together very well to address the important
topics staking see you. So I continue to be pleased
with our board and how everybody puts to you.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
First, at the start of the censure meeting at the
end of last month, Wanda James said the following.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
Today is not about a censure. It is about censorship
and retaliation. I was elected by the people of Colorado.
I was not hired by this board, and I will
not be silenced by its traditions or afraid of this vote.
I am being targeted for raising my voice against a
campaign that demeaned, dehumanized, and harmed the black community. They
(05:01):
think I violated my duties by speaking out against racism.
Speaker 1 (05:07):
Vice Chairman Ken Montera, talk to me for a moment
about the way in which your colleague, Regent Wanda James
has characterized this whole thing from the start, including that
censor vote and since then, but particularly in the context
of what you believe the more bored majority was going
for with this vote.
Speaker 4 (05:28):
Yeah, well, thank you, Jimmy. First of all, I think
It's important to recognize that when Regent James brought up
her objections to those illustrations, as you mentioned, they were
taken off almost immediately. I think it might have been
twenty four hours actually, So we responded to that very quickly.
And as you said, there were other images that were
both of brown people and white people which were not
(05:52):
didn't seem to be as offensive to her. But the
fact is is that we reacted to her concern she had,
and she continued to escalate and elevate the situation on
a daily basis for a long time, said that we
did not react and take down those images, and she
continued to press forward by trying to get the entire
program defunded, which was approved by the legislature and funded
(06:15):
by the Joint Budget Committee to educate Colorado relative to
the impact of ITC and developing minds. And as she
continued to try to discredit the research that was done
and the work that had been done at the School
of Public Health, and even go to the Governor's office
to ask them to take down the takeaway the funding
(06:36):
and divert it to minority owned businesses, it continued to
in our minds move forward relative to our reach of
responsibility fuduiciarily to the University of Colorado, only causing harm
to the university and creating an issue that I don't
think anybody on the board believe exists. Our strategic plan
specifically states so we will represent the universe the state
(06:59):
of Colorado at all of our campuses. Whether you're black, brown, country, urban,
wherever you may come from. We believe that there's an
opportunity for you at one of our campuses, and we
welcome you. And there is in no way that since
I've been on this board that we have done anything
but try to support that strategic plank and try to
offer the University of Colorado to every Colorado and that
(07:22):
may want to go to one of our campuses.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
That's well said. We are joined by the Chair and
Vice Chair, respectively, the CU Board of Regents, Cali Renaissance,
and Ken Monterra. I should note that this program was
directed by the Colorado State Legislature several years ago. The
t on THHC campaign is the result of that instruction,
and it is funded by marijuana tax dollars. And speaking
(07:46):
of the science here, this is one other thing that
Regent Wanda James said during the meeting just before the
center vote regarding the scientific piece, this.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
Was a two million dollars state funder campaign which CEU's
name all over it, targeting the black community with tire
tropes recycled drunk junk science. Of course I spoke as
a regent. I had a duty to do so. And
what did CU's leadership do. They stalled, they debated, and
(08:16):
not one of you regents responded to my texts when
I asked for your health.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Chair, Cally Rennison, I want you to respond to that
second piece about the communications and what sort of went
on in that regard when complaints were made, because it
seems to me like the university reacted quickly. But also
there is that academics piece, the academic freedom piece, that
you're supposed to allow scientists and professionals that are working
at these institutions like CU to do their job.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
Exactly right. I learned about the event doing with the
illustrations after they were already down, and that was about
twenty four hours later. Several hours after that, she texted
to me and wanted to know if I was going
to join her in dealing with it. I didn't return
the text because it was already solved. She also texted
to a few of the other Democrats, one of which
(09:08):
wrote back in Guana at that time told her don't worry,
it's taken care of and another one was busy at work.
So when she says she texted everyone, that's not true.
She did not text the Republicans, just the Democrats. So
that's again just something that is actually not true, and
that evidence is in the report that's available.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Online, extensive report as well. We have to take a
quick break, but on the other side, we will pick
up our conversation with Calli Renison and Ken Monterra from
the CU Board of Regents and talk a little bit
about the work that they're doing in a bipartisan fashion
and the example I think that's being set by this
board for others throughout Colorado. As we continue, Jimmy sang
(09:49):
In Berger in from Andy Conno, Kioway, joined by two
CU regents, a Democrat and a Republican respectively, the Chair
of the Board of Regents, Cali Renaissan of Boulder and
Chair Ken Montera of Colorado Springs, talking about the recent
censure vote and sanctions of their colleague Wanda James, and
before we get back to our guests, I do want
(10:11):
to play snippets wanted James, Democrat from the first Congressional
District of two other Democratic colleagues, Elana Spiegel and Elliott
Hood and what they had to say before casting their votes.
Speaker 5 (10:23):
One of the most challenging, dangerous challenges I feel we're
facing today is not disagreement over values or policy. It's
the contesting of basic facts. When that happens, we lose
common ground and weaken the University of Colorado system at
so many students, researchers, faculty depend on to build their future,
(10:44):
support the public good, and provide for each and every
one of their families.
Speaker 6 (10:49):
The bottom line is, regardless of your personal feelings or interests,
there was simply no justifiable reason to publicly and continuously
smear this research program, attempt to the research of our scientists,
and advocate to pull their funding. That is especially true
today when university research programs face significant funding uncertainty, and
(11:10):
over hostility from certain corners of the government. Our scientists
need our support now more than ever. They do not
need their elected leaders casting unfounded doubt on the integrity
of their work.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
I couldn't agree more with both of them. Regent Chair
Calli Renaissan and the contesting of basic facts that Alana
Spiegel mentioned there, I think was especially important because you
need to be grounded in facts in order to have
a real meaningful discussion. Talk to me a little bit
about that perspective and if there's anything that you think
is lacking in terms of knowledge or understanding about some
(11:45):
of the critical facts in this matter.
Speaker 2 (11:49):
Oh yes, thank you. Being a transparent board like we are,
we have all of this information available online. Is includes
the reason behind the center, which have nothing to do
with the illustrations. It also has to do with what
the sanctions involved with the center include. There's a lot
of misinformation being shared about what those sanctions are and
are not. For example, it's said that she's not allowed
(12:11):
to go to football games, and that's nonsense. Anybody can
go to a football game. What she's lost is three
football tickets. She's also stated she can't go to graduations.
That is untrue. That is part of her job as
a regent. She is still an elected regent and so
she is engaged in the work of regents. She just
doesn't get the extra perks and I would encourage people
(12:32):
to go to our web page and read those documents.
And one last thing I want to say is that
several times it's been stated that Todd Solomon, President Solomon,
has voted on the center or is behind it or
encouraging it, and I just want to put a stop
to that. That is simply not true. The Board is
President Solomon's boss. We talked to Todd about what happens,
(12:52):
not the other way around. He did not vote. It
was not his pushing that made this happen. This is
a board action. And when we're out of Vice.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Jerk Ken Monterra talk to me a little bit about
the bipartisan collaboration on this issue and more generally. But
I think it is important to note that this process
of the investigation began because you, both of you our
guests paired up and said, okay, we need to look
into this, and then ultimately you had a bipartisan vote
with seven members of the Board of Regions, including both
(13:22):
Democrats and Republicans, voting yes.
Speaker 4 (13:26):
Yeah, Jimmy, thank you. I think that's probably the most
clear example of bipartisanship that you could have on a
board was the vote that we had in the comments
that you heard from Regent Spiegel and Regil Elliott. I
think that you know, when Kelly and I were first
elected char and vice chair, which I think Kelly was
two and a half years ago now, the first time
(13:46):
that we were boot a chair, we made a commitment
to each other that we would run this sport from
a bipartisan standpoint. We talked to the regions on a
regular basis. We get their viewpoint. We make sure that
everybody's voice is heard, and it's heard clearly, and we
don't try to push our regents one way or the other.
They have clear voices, they have clear mandates from their constituency,
(14:07):
and I can tell you and of them clearly believe
that putting the University of Colorado first is what's most important.
And I could go to every one of those regents
and hear the same thing that above all that what
makes the university a more productive organization, serves more people
from Colorado, and allows us to build a future for
this state is paramount in their mind. And I think
(14:31):
that's why this has been a difficult thing to deal with,
because I feel we're dealing with a very partisan individual
that has one viewpoint and does not have a bipartisan
view on how she wants to see and lift the
University of Colorado. And it's showing as we go through
this process, and as Kelly's mentioned, we have spent way
too much time focusing on one individual versus the University
(14:54):
of Colorado and the thousands of students that we serve
on a daily basis.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Cher Kelly Ranison about thirty seconds for a final word here,
maybe piggybacking on that discussion of bipartisanship and how functionally
you guys really are as a board with this unfortunate
distraction for the past six months.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Great, well, person, I want to thank you for having
me on. I really appreciate it. Second, I want the
public to know that even though we've had this distraction,
we're still working very hard for the people at Colorado
and see you, and we're still doing it in a
bipartisan manner. I think that people can trust that when
we're making decisions, looking at policies or other things, we're
doing it with them first in our mind.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
Kudos to you both and to the Board of Regions
for holding your own accountable and especially Chair renn us
In to you and Region Spiegel and Hood because it
is not easy to challenge and to hold accountable a
member of your own political party, and that that's what
you're doing here. And I think that is both to
(15:53):
the credit the three of you and to the board
at large, but also to recognizing that this can and
should be done in a state like Colorado, where it
does seem like sometimes there's just one party running the show.
It's it's just a great message. So thank you both.
I really appreciate it.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
Thank you, thank thanks Jeremy. Appreciate you having us on.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Absolutely
A very important saga that is out of the University
of Colorado, which I don't think has gotten nearly enough attention,
certainly in terms of giving out the facts and the
reality of what has in fact been going on with
the story of the censure and sanctions of Wanda James,
(00:24):
the CB one first Congressional District Regent for the University
of Colorado. Of course, there's a eight member, nine member
board of Regents, eight elected for each congressional district one
at large, and Wanda James had, going back to late January,
begun a crusade to defund entirely a public health awareness
(00:50):
program to educate kids and pregnant mothers, in particular on
the risks of high potency th that central ingredient in marijuana.
Wanda James, in addition to being a CU regent, is
a prominent marijuana shop owner. In fact, her claim to
(01:14):
fame in that regard is that she owns the first
black owned legal marijuana dispensary, and that was a big
thing when she ran for CU regent and when this
campaign was out there, put out by the Colorado School
of Public Health, which is at three universities, but particularly here,
the University of Colorado. She claimed that their t on
(01:38):
THHC program, done by the School of Public Health and
Nishim Health, a public benefit corporation, that what they had
put out in images, these medical illustrations of children in
utero and older, were racist because they were of black children.
(02:02):
Never mind that there were white children in identical images
as well. But she decreed that it was racist and
made a protest and they were taken down within like
forty eight hours. Those images were taken down, but she
continued to persist in trying to defund the program and
got in contact with her friends at the Governor's office
(02:22):
to try and make this happen. Ultimately, she was censured
by her colleagues in a by partisan vote after an
investigation that was initiated in a bi partisan way by
my two guests here on KOA. I am joined by
Cali Renaissan, the chair of the CU Board of Regents,
a Democrat from Boulder, and Ken Monterra, the Vice chair
(02:44):
of the CU Board of Regents hailing from Colorado Springs,
a Republican. They both joined me now in the kind
of bipartisan fashion, I think folks will start to expect
more of and more of out of the CU Board
of Regents. Welcome regions. Thank you both so much for
joining me.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Thank you very strue ready to be here.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
I would welcome the chance to start with you. Regent
Chair Renaissan, how do you look at what has evolved
over time? Because not only had Wanda James, your colleague,
accused this program of being racist even after the images
were taken down, but there have been accusations lobbed against
(03:26):
all of you who voted in a majority vote and
a bipartisan fashion two centsurre and sanction region James saying
that what you all did in that was racist. How
do you respond and what do you look at this
vote in terms of its implications and the message sent.
Speaker 2 (03:43):
I think several things. One, what we did was the
best for CU. We're upholding our oaths, and we're following
through and holding people accountable who break our policies, just
as we would for a student staff or faculty member.
It's part of our job as a self governing board.
I think the continued, continued behaviors that we've seen in
(04:05):
actions are in an unfortunate distraction. They've burned a lot
of time, a lot of people's time, which at this
day and age, we don't really we need that time
to do other things. I'm happy to say the board
continues to work together very well to address the important
topics staking see you. So I continue to be pleased
with our board and how everybody puts to you.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
First, at the start of the censure meeting at the
end of last month, Wanda James said the following.
Speaker 3 (04:37):
Today is not about a censure. It is about censorship
and retaliation. I was elected by the people of Colorado.
I was not hired by this board, and I will
not be silenced by its traditions or afraid of this vote.
I am being targeted for raising my voice against a
campaign that demeaned, dehumanized, and harmed the black community. They
(05:01):
think I violated my duties by speaking out against racism.
Speaker 1 (05:07):
Vice Chairman Ken Montera, talk to me for a moment
about the way in which your colleague, Regent Wanda James
has characterized this whole thing from the start, including that
censor vote and since then, but particularly in the context
of what you believe the more bored majority was going
for with this vote.
Speaker 4 (05:28):
Yeah, well, thank you, Jimmy. First of all, I think
It's important to recognize that when Regent James brought up
her objections to those illustrations, as you mentioned, they were
taken off almost immediately. I think it might have been
twenty four hours actually, So we responded to that very quickly.
And as you said, there were other images that were
both of brown people and white people which were not
(05:52):
didn't seem to be as offensive to her. But the
fact is is that we reacted to her concern she had,
and she continued to escalate and elevate the situation on
a daily basis for a long time, said that we
did not react and take down those images, and she
continued to press forward by trying to get the entire
program defunded, which was approved by the legislature and funded
(06:15):
by the Joint Budget Committee to educate Colorado relative to
the impact of ITC and developing minds. And as she
continued to try to discredit the research that was done
and the work that had been done at the School
of Public Health, and even go to the Governor's office
to ask them to take down the takeaway the funding
(06:36):
and divert it to minority owned businesses, it continued to
in our minds move forward relative to our reach of
responsibility fuduiciarily to the University of Colorado, only causing harm
to the university and creating an issue that I don't
think anybody on the board believe exists. Our strategic plan
specifically states so we will represent the universe the state
(06:59):
of Colorado at all of our campuses. Whether you're black, brown, country, urban,
wherever you may come from. We believe that there's an
opportunity for you at one of our campuses, and we
welcome you. And there is in no way that since
I've been on this board that we have done anything
but try to support that strategic plank and try to
offer the University of Colorado to every Colorado and that
(07:22):
may want to go to one of our campuses.
Speaker 1 (07:24):
That's well said. We are joined by the Chair and
Vice Chair, respectively, the CU Board of Regents, Cali Renaissance,
and Ken Monterra. I should note that this program was
directed by the Colorado State Legislature several years ago. The
t on THHC campaign is the result of that instruction,
and it is funded by marijuana tax dollars. And speaking
(07:46):
of the science here, this is one other thing that
Regent Wanda James said during the meeting just before the
center vote regarding the scientific piece, this.
Speaker 3 (07:56):
Was a two million dollars state funder campaign which CEU's
name all over it, targeting the black community with tire
tropes recycled drunk junk science. Of course I spoke as
a regent. I had a duty to do so. And
what did CU's leadership do. They stalled, they debated, and
(08:16):
not one of you regents responded to my texts when
I asked for your health.
Speaker 1 (08:22):
Chair, Cally Rennison, I want you to respond to that
second piece about the communications and what sort of went
on in that regard when complaints were made, because it
seems to me like the university reacted quickly. But also
there is that academics piece, the academic freedom piece, that
you're supposed to allow scientists and professionals that are working
at these institutions like CU to do their job.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
Exactly right. I learned about the event doing with the
illustrations after they were already down, and that was about
twenty four hours later. Several hours after that, she texted
to me and wanted to know if I was going
to join her in dealing with it. I didn't return
the text because it was already solved. She also texted
to a few of the other Democrats, one of which
(09:08):
wrote back in Guana at that time told her don't worry,
it's taken care of and another one was busy at work.
So when she says she texted everyone, that's not true.
She did not text the Republicans, just the Democrats. So
that's again just something that is actually not true, and
that evidence is in the report that's available.
Speaker 1 (09:27):
Online, extensive report as well. We have to take a
quick break, but on the other side, we will pick
up our conversation with Calli Renison and Ken Monterra from
the CU Board of Regents and talk a little bit
about the work that they're doing in a bipartisan fashion
and the example I think that's being set by this
board for others throughout Colorado. As we continue, Jimmy sang
(09:49):
In Berger in from Andy Conno, Kioway, joined by two
CU regents, a Democrat and a Republican respectively, the Chair
of the Board of Regents, Cali Renaissan of Boulder and
Chair Ken Montera of Colorado Springs, talking about the recent
censure vote and sanctions of their colleague Wanda James, and
before we get back to our guests, I do want
(10:11):
to play snippets wanted James, Democrat from the first Congressional
District of two other Democratic colleagues, Elana Spiegel and Elliott
Hood and what they had to say before casting their votes.
Speaker 5 (10:23):
One of the most challenging, dangerous challenges I feel we're
facing today is not disagreement over values or policy. It's
the contesting of basic facts. When that happens, we lose
common ground and weaken the University of Colorado system at
so many students, researchers, faculty depend on to build their future,
(10:44):
support the public good, and provide for each and every
one of their families.
Speaker 6 (10:49):
The bottom line is, regardless of your personal feelings or interests,
there was simply no justifiable reason to publicly and continuously
smear this research program, attempt to the research of our scientists,
and advocate to pull their funding. That is especially true
today when university research programs face significant funding uncertainty, and
(11:10):
over hostility from certain corners of the government. Our scientists
need our support now more than ever. They do not
need their elected leaders casting unfounded doubt on the integrity
of their work.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
I couldn't agree more with both of them. Regent Chair
Calli Renaissan and the contesting of basic facts that Alana
Spiegel mentioned there, I think was especially important because you
need to be grounded in facts in order to have
a real meaningful discussion. Talk to me a little bit
about that perspective and if there's anything that you think
is lacking in terms of knowledge or understanding about some
(11:45):
of the critical facts in this matter.
Speaker 2 (11:49):
Oh yes, thank you. Being a transparent board like we are,
we have all of this information available online. Is includes
the reason behind the center, which have nothing to do
with the illustrations. It also has to do with what
the sanctions involved with the center include. There's a lot
of misinformation being shared about what those sanctions are and
are not. For example, it's said that she's not allowed
(12:11):
to go to football games, and that's nonsense. Anybody can
go to a football game. What she's lost is three
football tickets. She's also stated she can't go to graduations.
That is untrue. That is part of her job as
a regent. She is still an elected regent and so
she is engaged in the work of regents. She just
doesn't get the extra perks and I would encourage people
(12:32):
to go to our web page and read those documents.
And one last thing I want to say is that
several times it's been stated that Todd Solomon, President Solomon,
has voted on the center or is behind it or
encouraging it, and I just want to put a stop
to that. That is simply not true. The Board is
President Solomon's boss. We talked to Todd about what happens,
(12:52):
not the other way around. He did not vote. It
was not his pushing that made this happen. This is
a board action. And when we're out of Vice.
Speaker 1 (13:01):
Jerk Ken Monterra talk to me a little bit about
the bipartisan collaboration on this issue and more generally. But
I think it is important to note that this process
of the investigation began because you, both of you our
guests paired up and said, okay, we need to look
into this, and then ultimately you had a bipartisan vote
with seven members of the Board of Regions, including both
(13:22):
Democrats and Republicans, voting yes.
Speaker 4 (13:26):
Yeah, Jimmy, thank you. I think that's probably the most
clear example of bipartisanship that you could have on a
board was the vote that we had in the comments
that you heard from Regent Spiegel and Regil Elliott. I
think that you know, when Kelly and I were first
elected char and vice chair, which I think Kelly was
two and a half years ago now, the first time
(13:46):
that we were boot a chair, we made a commitment
to each other that we would run this sport from
a bipartisan standpoint. We talked to the regions on a
regular basis. We get their viewpoint. We make sure that
everybody's voice is heard, and it's heard clearly, and we
don't try to push our regents one way or the other.
They have clear voices, they have clear mandates from their constituency,
(14:07):
and I can tell you and of them clearly believe
that putting the University of Colorado first is what's most important.
And I could go to every one of those regents
and hear the same thing that above all that what
makes the university a more productive organization, serves more people
from Colorado, and allows us to build a future for
this state is paramount in their mind. And I think
(14:31):
that's why this has been a difficult thing to deal with,
because I feel we're dealing with a very partisan individual
that has one viewpoint and does not have a bipartisan
view on how she wants to see and lift the
University of Colorado. And it's showing as we go through
this process, and as Kelly's mentioned, we have spent way
too much time focusing on one individual versus the University
(14:54):
of Colorado and the thousands of students that we serve
on a daily basis.
Speaker 1 (14:58):
Cher Kelly Ranison about thirty seconds for a final word here,
maybe piggybacking on that discussion of bipartisanship and how functionally
you guys really are as a board with this unfortunate
distraction for the past six months.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
Great, well, person, I want to thank you for having
me on. I really appreciate it. Second, I want the
public to know that even though we've had this distraction,
we're still working very hard for the people at Colorado
and see you, and we're still doing it in a
bipartisan manner. I think that people can trust that when
we're making decisions, looking at policies or other things, we're
doing it with them first in our mind.
Speaker 1 (15:33):
Kudos to you both and to the Board of Regions
for holding your own accountable and especially Chair renn us
In to you and Region Spiegel and Hood because it
is not easy to challenge and to hold accountable a
member of your own political party, and that that's what
you're doing here. And I think that is both to
(15:53):
the credit the three of you and to the board
at large, but also to recognizing that this can and
should be done in a state like Colorado, where it
does seem like sometimes there's just one party running the show.
It's it's just a great message. So thank you both.
I really appreciate it.
Speaker 4 (16:10):
Thank you, thank thanks Jeremy. Appreciate you having us on.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Absolutely
The Mandy Connell Podcast News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com