Sam Sena (center) and other CU Boulder community members condemn OpenAI contract at CUSG legislative council meeting on Oct. 1, 2026. (Avery Clifton/CU Independent)
The University of Colorado Boulder Student Government challenged how the university makes decisions about the $2 million OpenAI contract, announced in February. On Friday, CU student body presidents signed a resolution calling for Boulder campus leadership to have a voice in the ChatGPT Edu partnership.
CUSG is calling for CU to adopt the resolution’s recommendations, including reviewing and potentially renegotiating the contract. Otherwise, CUSG recommends terminating the agreement.
“This affects our education. This affects the professor’s ability to teach and the staff’s ability to research,” said Owen Andrews, representative-at-large and coauthor of the resolution.
The three-year, annually renewed contract provides university-controlled ChatGPT access across the CU campuses, currently at no charge. Some CU community members have condemned the contract, citing environmental impacts, privacy concerns and ethical implications.
“I think that this resolution comes back to the belief of the university needing to give students a voice, faculty a voice and staff a voice,” Amanda Kinder, co-author of the resolution and council of colleges and schools chair said at a legislative meeting on Thursday.
Inside the resolution
The resolution calls for a committee of CU Boulder Staff Council, CUSG and Boulder Faculty Assembly representatives to approve CU’s partnership with OpenAI.
Though a committee of faculty members reviewed the contract, CU Boulder campus faculty were not consulted, which is a primary complaint outlined in the resolution. It claims that three faculty members across the four campuses were consulted but did not endorse the contract.
The resolution notes the Faculty Council surveyed 207 faculty members about the contract. In the survey, about 78% of respondents believed the contract showed minimal benefits compared to its drawbacks, or did not serve university interests.
In addition to assembling a new committee, the resolution calls on the university president to host meetings on every CU campus where each community can discuss the contract. Andrews said the meetings would serve as a forum for students, faculty and staff to provide input and influence the contract.
The resolution raises concerns about OpenAI’s designation as a “school official” under the contract. Under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, this allows OpenAI to access certain educational records on behalf of the university. CUSG argues the contract does not clearly outline safeguards regarding what data OpenAI can collect.
The contract also allows OpenAI to use “de-identified” data, which removes the user’s identifying information, but retains the content.
“In failing to define sufficiently clear limitations on the creation, storage and usage of de-identified data, the agreement fails to sufficiently protect student data,” the resolution reads.
It continues, claiming the training course does not adequately address concerns related to hallucinations and sustainability. While the training noted students should look critically at artificial intelligence outputs and do further research on its environmental impacts, it fails to address specifics. The resolution also claims the university’s guidance around copyright and plagiarism are vague, and users need more concrete standards.
Finally, the resolution questions whether AI is appropriate for use across all academic fields.
“A systemwide license should not be treated as a systemwide endorsement of AI,” the resolution reads.
It recommends schools and colleges under the university should be given the choice to opt-in to use ChatGPT Edu.
While the System Office paid for the first year of the contract, each campus will pay the cost the following years. The resolution suggests that only students participating in programs that have opted in will be charged for the service in the future.
ChatGPT Edu on campus
The initial announcement acknowledged community concerns over generative AI, but described ChatGPT Edu access as a “matter of equity.”
“The importance of this tool today and in the future for our students, faculty and staff offers a return on investment we cannot ignore,” the university wrote in the February announcement.
According to the university, ChatGPT Edu offers a safer, more equitable and efficient alternative to the public version of ChatGPT. Use is optional and students are expected to follow faculty AI guidelines in their courses.
Originally, the university planned to release ChatGPT Edu to students, faculty and staff on March 31. Faculty and staff gained access on schedule, but student access was delayed until August.
“We have heard concerns from faculty about disruption to the learning environment and take Faculty Council concerns seriously,” the administration said in a university-wide email in March. “We fully endorse the right of faculty to establish and maintain their individual classroom expectations.”
Eligible CU students, faculty and staff can access ChatGPT Edu after completing a 30-minute Canvas training course developed in collaboration with the Faculty Council.
The university notes data entered into ChatGPT Edu belongs to CU and is not used to train OpenAI models. CU says it uses the data for troubleshooting and “better understanding of adoption and use patterns.”
Campus perceptions
CUSG held a public hearing at its legislative meeting on Thursday where students and faculty discussed the OpenAI contract.
14 people addressed the council, according to the meeting minutes. Some raised concerns about how AI impacts sustainability, ethics, mental health, academic trust and students with disabilities.
Alexander Cisneros said he worried his computer accommodation through Disability Services could lead instructors to suspect him of using his accommodation to access AI. He claimed the contract makes it easier for students to cheat using AI, which impacts how professors perceive all students.
“I do not understand why we’d want to potentially increase stigma for students seeking accommodations when we already have to psych ourselves up to self-advocate in the first place,” Cisneros said.
Keeley Haynes, a senior journalism student, said she was inaccurately accused of using AI by a professor.
“AI strongly halts our ability to have productive relationships and productive conversations with our professors because we’re constantly pointing fingers,” Haynes said.
Jed Brown, associate professor of computer science and BFA member, raised concerns about OpenAI’s use of de-identified data, calling it a “serious problem.”
Sophomore and co-chair of CU Boulder Young Democratic Socialists of America member Sam Sena discussed the impact of AI data centers on low-income communities.
“This is an age-old story about the most powerful people in a society forcing the weakest to bear the cost of progress,” Sena said. “And I’m sorry, but if this is the cost of progress, I don’t want it. “
Sena said he previously used AI but changed his stance after learning about its impact on communities.
“I kind of went down this radicalization, you know, rabbit hole when I found out just how bad it was,” Sena said.
Third year student Nate Wasylik raised concerns about ChatGPT’s connection to incidents of violence and suicide. He referenced a shooting at Florida State University, where the gunman allegedly used a chatbot for planning. He urged the council to use its platform to condemn ChatGPT use on campus.
“These atrocities that OpenAI is committing, that ChatGPT is enabling, they’re being done in our name now,” Wasylik said.
The resolution also garnered support beyond the meeting room. A survey collected about 527 sponsors across the CU campuses in addition to its initial cosponsors.
Later in the meeting, Kinder noted the hearing’s turnout.
“I was so impressed with the amount of people that came to speak to us tonight,” Kinder said. “I think it was such a beautiful way of people to, like, let us know that they care about something.”
The University of Colorado Boulder was unable to provide a comment on the resolution before the publication date.
This is a developing story and may be updated.
Contact CU Independent Editor-in-chief Avery Clifton at Avery.clifton@colorado.edu
