Total contributions: $76,405, including about $40,000 Hooton has contributed herself.

Total spent: $16,062. Much of that was spent on consulting, including at least $7,500 to Chris Nicholson and $2,500 to Anna Wert, who manages campaigns for Rep. Joe Neguse and state Sen. Judy Amabile, among others.

Education: Undergraduate coursework at the University of Alaska; master’s degree in public administration from the University of Pennsylvania, 1993

CU connections: Hooton serves as a mentor in the Boulder-CU Leadership Program and as a moderator for CU’s Conference on World Affairs. Her son earned two degrees from CU, and she has lived in Boulder since 1997.

Job: Since leaving the Colorado House race in 2022, Hooton has remained politically active, co-chairing Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood’s annual fundraiser, working with legislators on mobile homeowner protections and hosting fundraisers for Democratic candidates, among other activities.

Endorsements: State Sen. Judy Amabile; CU Regent Elliot Hood; Boulder County Commissioner Ashley Stolzmann; former candidate Kris Larsen; state Rep. Andy Boesenecker; Boulder Mayor Aaron Brockett; Boulder City Councilmembers Tara Winer, Matt Benjamin, Mark Wallach and Tina Marquis; District Attorney Michael Dougherty; former House Speaker KC Becker; former Senate President Steve Fenberg; and former Boulder City Councilmember and county treasurer candidate Rachel Friend. Read the full list. Read the full list.

Questionnaire

1) What is your personal connection to CU? Why are you interested in serving on the Board of Regents, and what sets you apart from the other candidates in this race? 

I have lived in Boulder since 1997, raised two children here, am a CU Mom, and served six years in the legislature representing CU Boulder. I am running because CU is Colorado’s most vital engine of economic and social mobility, and it requires steady, experienced leadership. What distinguishes me is my direct experience overseeing higher education funding as chair of the Capital Development Committee. I have the regional relationships, policy expertise and fiscal background to manage CU’s multibillion-dollar budget, lower barriers for working families, and defend the university against political interference from day one.

2) Before running for Regent, what have you done to support, strengthen, or invest in public education?

Throughout my three terms in the Colorado House, investing in public education was a core priority. As chair of the Capital Development Committee, I directly managed the review, prioritization, and funding recommendations for infrastructure and capital needs across all state colleges and universities. I fought to secure robust state investments to modernize campuses, expand research capabilities, and keep tuition costs manageable for working families. My work earned me the distinction of being named CU’s “Legislator of the Year” in 2017, reflecting my deep, proven commitment to strengthening Colorado’s public higher education ecosystem.

3) Regents are responsible for major policy, governance, and budget decisions across the university system. What experience do you have making high-level organizational or financial decisions? 

My entire legislative career prepared me for the immense fiscal responsibilities of a CU Regent. As chair of the Capital Development Committee, I led a bipartisan panel that analyzed complex, competing funding requests from state institutions and made high-stakes recommendations directly to the Joint Budget Committee. This required deep structural understanding of multi-billion-dollar state budgets, rigorous financial oversight, and the ability to balance immediate operational costs with long-term capital investments. I have a proven track record of making transparent, data-driven financial decisions that protect public resources and maximize institutional impact.

4) Do you support collective bargaining rights for university employees, and would you vote in favor of them if they came before the board? Why or why not?

Yes, I fully support collective bargaining rights for university employees, and I would vote in their favor if they came before the board. Our faculty, graduate workers, researchers, and staff are the backbone of the CU system; their working conditions directly impact our students’ learning conditions.

When workers have a seat at the table to negotiate fair wages, benefits, and workplace safety, it leads to a more stable, dedicated, and high-quality workforce. This is particularly critical right now as rising housing costs and the overall cost of living in the Denver-Boulder metro area make it increasingly difficult for university staff to live in the communities where they work.

5) Would you support CU joining the proposed statewide defense compact against federal threats to academic freedom and university funding, as proposed by the Boulder Faculty Assembly? Why or why not? 

I support CU joining the proposed statewide defense compact as a second line of defense to the State Attorney General’s mandate to defend CU legally. The unstable federal landscape presents an unprecedented threat to higher education, targeting academic freedom, diversity initiatives, and vital funding. This isn’t abstract; CU’s FY 26-27 budget projects a 9% ($60.4 million) drop in research expenditures driven by federal clawbacks. When public institutions face targeted overreach, we must stand together. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser demonstrated the power of an aggressive legal defense, co-leading a 24-state lawsuit against the federal government to block harmful, unauthorized caps on federal graduate student loans that threaten student access. Recently, federal courts in Denver stepped in to halt politically motivated attempts by Washington to dismantle NCAR.

Higher education institutions are stronger when they build broad coalitions. A unified statewide defense compact creates a critical legal and financial firebreak. It allows Colorado’s universities to collectively insulate vital funding, protect student privacy, and safeguard the integrity of our research and curricula from external ideological interference. As a former legislator, I know how to leverage these state-level partnerships to protect CU from day one.

6) In recent months, protesters have urged the CU Regents to end CU Boulder’s contract with Key Lime Air because of the company’s contracts with ICE to transport detainees. Would you support the Regents ending that contract? Why or why not?

I strongly support CU Boulder ending its contract with Key Lime Air. As a public institution, our business partnerships cannot be separated from our core values of human dignity, inclusivity, and community safety. Facilitating operations where immigrants are shackled at the waist and ankles is reprehensible; it flies in the face of human decency and has no place in the university ecosystem.

7) How would you balance concerns about campus safety, harassment and hate speech with protections for free expression and political protest, and what role should the Board of Regents play in those decisions? 

Balancing open discourse with campus safety is one of the most delicate challenges a university faces. As a public institution, CU must strictly adhere to the First Amendment, protecting political protest and free expression — even when the ideas expressed are deeply unpopular or uncomfortable. Robust debate is essential to academic growth.

However, free speech is not absolute; it ends where targeted harassment, physical threats, and discrimination begin. Students cannot learn, and faculty cannot teach, in an environment of fear.

The Board of Regents’ role is to establish clear, viewpoint-neutral policies that ensure campus spaces remain safe and operational, while fiercely defending the right to peaceful protest. Regents must not intervene in day-to-day enforcement or police political content. Instead, we should ensure that campus leadership has the guidelines and resources to protect physical safety, clearly define and enforce boundaries against unlawful harassment, and maintain a campus culture where rigorous, peaceful disagreement can occur safely without compromising the fundamental well-being of our community.

8) University leadership and the regents recently faced criticism over a $2 million partnership with OpenAI to provide ChatGPT access to students and staff. The board is now considering a broader AI policy framework. In your view, what should be the principles or priorities guiding CU’s approach to artificial intelligence?

To ensure a CU degree remains a ticket to economic opportunity in a changing market, our AI policy framework must move beyond administrative rhetoric and focus on two distinct, guiding priorities:

  • Designing AI into the curriculum: With CU launching a system-wide ChatGPT Edu product rollout this August, we must ensure every student, regardless of major, graduates with “AI-durable” skills. This means high-level mastery, training students to utilize AI as a tool for innovation, efficiency, and real-world problem-solving.
  • Designing AI out of the curriculum: We must intentionally protect and double down on human-only traits that technology cannot replicate – leadership, critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. As a mentor in CU’s Center for Leadership, I know these traits remain a graduate’s ultimate competitive advantage.

Finally, this framework must respect academic freedom, ensuring faculty members retain a critical voice in how technology is integrated into their classrooms. We are in a race between technology and education. As Regent, I will work with the CU AI community to ensure the university wins that race, protecting our investment and safeguarding student data and research privacy.