Agenda

J-Dl\41

~

lolt>

~t.110) \C\~9

f)ReHIVE'

State

Board

gf

Agriculture

SEP 20

1979

_ __________ Meeting

Fort Lewis College

University of Southern

Colorado

Colorado State University

I

CALENDAR OF ACTIVITIES

use

CAMPUS - PUEBLO SEPTEMBER 19-20, 1979

September 19

5:00 - 7:30 p.m. Social Hour and Buf fet Dinner wit h Leg i slative Members from Colorado Springs, Puebl o and Adjacent Areas - President Love's Residence

September 20

7:30 p.m. USC Institutional Corrnnittee Meet i ng with the Advisory Presidential Search Committee -Administrat i on Building, Belmont Campus

7:15 - 8:30 a.m. Breakfast with Seven or Eight Faculty Members -Discussion and Presentations of Academic Programs 8:30 a.m. General Business of the Board

12:00 - 1:15 p.m. Luncheon with the USC Foundation and the Regional Press Regarding the Dartmouth Computer Connection -Student Center

1:15 - 1:30 p.m. Visit the Physics/Math Building to See the Terminal in Operation

1:30 - 2:30 p.m. Tour of the Belmont Campus - Re Deferred Maintenance Projects and Concerns

2:30 p.m. Continuation of Board Business

UBRi\RlES

AAoo STAl'f.: UNIV( ~rt'!: '1fJ r. illOl.L • CQ.l.~111\llQ

Report of the Secretary

to the

State Board of Agriculture

and

General Board Business

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY COMMITTEE REPORTS

GENERAL BUSINESS TO THE

STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE

SEPTEMBER 20, 1979 PUEBLO

I N D E X

Approval of the Minutes of the August 16, 1979 Minutes Dates and Locations for Future Meetings

Appointment Joseph Goldhammer as Legal Counsel of the SBA Master Contract Request by Faculty of USC

Audit Conunittee Meeting of August 21st

Response of Representative Anne McGill Gorsuch to Dr. John Fuhr's Speech - Governor's Workshop

Litigation Report PAGE 1-1 2-1 3-1

4-1

5-1 6-1 7-1

Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business 1-1

SBA MEETING 9/20/79

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Approval of the minutes of the August 16, 1979 meeting of the board, as reported by the Executive Director

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

MOVED, that the Board approve the Minutes of the Executive Director, the Committees and General Business of the Board, SBA System, Fort Lewis College, Colorado State University, the University of

Southern Colorado, Pueblo Vocational Community College and the Treasurer in the form in which they were mailed to the board.

EXPLANATION:

Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business

SBA MEETING 9/20/79 2-1

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Dates and Locations for Future Meetings RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Information only EXPLANATION:

The following meetings have been set for the State Board of Agriculture:

September 20 Pueblo USC, PVCC, FLC Business

October 18 Denver CSU Business

November 15 Durango USC, PVCC, FLC Business

December 12 Fort Collins All Institutions - Statutory January 25-26 Winter Seminar - Place to be Announced

February 29 Denver CSU .!}usiness

March 28 Pueblo USC, PVCC, FLC Business

April Cancelled

May 14 Fort Collins All Institutions

(Date set by statute)

June 27 Durango FLC, USC, PVCC Business

(CSU' s Budgets)

July 15-19 Pingree Park Sunnner Seminar

Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business

SBA Meeting 9/20/79 3-1

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Appointment of Joseph Goldhammer as Legal Counsel to the State Board of Agriculture

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Moved, that the Board authorize a monthly salary of $2,750 to Joseph Goldhammer, effective September 17, 1979, in his capacity as Legal Counsel to the State Board of Agriculture.

EXPLANATION:

Executive Committee and the State Attorney General J. D. Mac Farlane have met and agreed to the above action .

Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business

SBA Meeting 9/20/79 4-1

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Master Contract Request by Faculty of USC

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Moved, that the Board approve/disapprove the Faculty request for a Master Contract at USC

Secretary's Report

Conunittees and General Business

SBA Meeting 9/20/79 5-1

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Audit Committee Meeting of August 21, 1979

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

None - Information Only

EXPLANATION:

Verbal Report by Board Members and Presidents Chamberlain and Love.

MINUTES OF

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING AUGUST 8, 1979

The Executive Committee met in Denver on August 8, 1979, to discuss the Agenda for the August 16 meeting of the Board.

The Committee reviewed the USC Presidential Job Announcemen t with the proposal to create a Presidential Search Advisory Committee; Governor Lamm's Executive Order to reduce motor fuel consumption; a draft of the letter to the Attorney General regarding Footnote 85-c; and the Calendar of Activities of the State Board of Agriculture.

The Committee reviewed, in detail, the Governor's Workshop and the guidelines for submitting a 7% General Fund budget and the programmatic implications of such. They will recommend to the Board, the submittal of two budgets - one as adopted at Keystone, and another which will be comparable to other State Agencies. The Corrunittee also dis cussed who can and should request Attorney General opinions, and will recommend to the Board a policy re-garding the same.

Present were: President Edmond F. Noel, Jr., Dr. Jean Graham, Mr. John Stegner and Dr. John Fuhr.

Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business SBA Meeting 9/20/79

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

6-1

Speech of Dr. John Fuhr - Governor's Workshop

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

None - information only

EXPLANATION:

Secretary's Report

Connnittees and General Business SBA Meeting 9/20/79

c

0 p

y

Mr. Eugene T. Petrone Executive Director

State Board of Agriculture 102 Administration Building CSU Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Dear Mr. Petrone:

6-l(a)

~any thanks for the copy of Dr. Fuhr' s comments. I cer tainly agree with

the thrust of his introductory remarks, but would recommend to you the recent WICHE study regarding expectations of enrollment levels in our institutions of higher education in the next twenty years , which would indicate that rather than the "rush toward judgment" which Dr. Fuhr

cites, our planning for higher education must be flexible in this regard. Further, he cites a "conflict" with the statutory spending limitation. Apparently the conflict is between the limit and educa tional needs which are magnified by inflation and population growth . I would suggest there is no question that there is a concerted effort on the part of the

General Assembly to fulfill a campaign promise made to the public it serves, to wit: they promised to cut the size and cost of government. Wi t·h reference to the "decline in the credibility and standards of h igher education with the General Assembly ... ," I would suggest that credibility is not enhanced when: a) there is a 7% spending limitation which has been adopted b) enrollment figures are declining and c) knowing these two facts, the institutions of higher education submitted budget requests to the General Assembly requesting increases which range between 21-50%.

I will not burden you with a detailed response to each of Dr, Fuhr' s comments, but have taken the time merely to point out that as policy makers, we are col'Jlllitted to fulfilling our responsibility in maintaining quality in higher education . We are further committed to forming a "bond" or "partnership" with our fellow policy makers in the executive branch when the bond or partnership will lead to a fulfillmznt of the best interests of the people of the state.

Sincerely,

Anne McGill Gorsuch Representative State of Colorado

7-1 Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business SBA MEETING 9/20/79

MATTERS FOR ACTION: Pending Litigation RECOMMENDED ACTION:

No Action Required - Report Only

EXPLANATION:

Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business

SBA Meeting 9/20/79 7-l(a)

REPORT TO THE STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE

ON PENDING LITIGATION

A. Litigation Pending in Federal Court.

1. Mary Alice Hill v. Colorado State University, et al.

No change.

2. Keith R. Grebe v. the State Board of Agriculture, et al.

No change.

3. Goodwin v. the Pueblo Vocational Community College, et al.

I have filed a motion to dismiss in this case on grounds of

mootness.

B. Litigation Pending in State Court.

1. The Painter Estate

No change.

2. Colette v. the State Board of Agriculture, et al.

No change.

3. Alvin Miller v. the State Board of Agriculture

Discovery is continuing in this case.

4. Reba Lawrence v. the State of Colorado and the Prudential Life

Insurance Company

This case is brought by the beneficiaries under a life insurance

policy bought through CSU's group life insurance plan. The

Pru-dential Life Insurance Company contends that the owner of the

policy had not fulfilled one of the conditions to coverage before

she died. However, CSU had accepted premiums from the owner of

the policy before her death, and had informed the beneficiaries

of coverage after death. The state is named as agent for the

Prudential Life Insurance Company.

C. Cases in which Counsel for the State's Insurer Is Representing the

Board.

1. Tompkins v. the State Board of Agriculture

No change.

Secretary's Report

Committees and General Business

SBA Meeting 9/20/79 7-l(b)

C. Cases in which Counsel for the State's Insurer Is Representing the

Board. (Cont'd.)

2. James A. Nelson v. the State Board of Agriculture

No change.

3. Tracey Mumey and Vernon Porter v. Colorado State University

No change.

4. Beth Margaret Kubl y v. the State Board of Agriculture

No change.

P 0 L I C Y I S S U E S

I N D E X

SECRETARY'S REPORT: Master Contract Request by Faculty of USC POLICY NO. 1 Secretary's Report page 4-1

FORT LEWIS COLLEGE: Carryin Items Re: 1980-81 Budget Request POLICY NO . 2

USC: Response on "Low Productivity Programs POLICY NO. 3 USC Agenda Page 2-3

USC: Approval of Proposed Degree Programs, B.S. and POLICY NO . 4 A.A . S. in Computer Scienc e Technology USC 2-4

USC : Approval of University of Southern Colorado's POLICY NO. 5 FY-1980-81 Capita l Construc tion Bud get

Request. USC Agenda Page 4-1

PVCC: Approval of 1980-81 Pueblo Vocational Community POLICY NO. 6

College Budget Request. PVCC Agenda Page 1-1

PVCC: Capital Construc tion Request for Academi c Yea r POLICY NO. 7 1979-80. PVCC Agenda Page 1-3

CSU: Land: Resolution of Title Defects in Land Parcels POLICY NO . 8 Conveyed to the City of Fort Collins from the

B. B. Harris and M.A. Harris Tracts of Foothills Campus . CSU Agenda 1-2.

CSU: Irrigation: Contract between SBA and Lake Sherwood POLICY NO, 9 Venture Pertaining to Replacement of Irrigation

Ditch with Underground Pipeline. CSU Agenda 1-3.

CSU: CSU Water Agreement: Amendment to the Operating POLICY NO. 10 Agreement Between the SBA and the Northern Colo

Water Conservancy District. CSU Agenda 1-4.

CSU : Athletics Budgets 1978-79 and 1979-80. CSUl-11. POLICY NO . 11 CSU: CSU-US Forest Servic e Land Exchange. CSU Agenda POLICY NO. 12

P 0 L I C Y I S S U E S SECRETARY'S REPORT

Secretary's Report Page 4-1 Committees and General Business SBA Meeting 9/20/79

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

POLICY NO. 1

Master Contract Request by Faculty of USC RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Moved, that the Board approve/d isapprove the Faculty request for a Master Contract at USC

P 0 L I C Y I S S U E S FORT LEWIS COLLEGE

POLICY NO. 2

P 0 L I C Y I S S U E S UNIVERSITY SOUTHERN COLORADO

POLICY NO. 3

USC Agenda Page 2-3

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979

~~

Approved

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Respons e on "Low Product ivity " Programs

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

MOVED, that the State Board of Agricultu r e approve the response of the University of Southern Colorado to the recommend at ions of the Colorado Commission on Higher Education on "low productivity" programs and incorporate this ma terial into the Board's response to the Commission.

EXPLANATION:

The Board received at its May meeting th e University ' s report on those of its programs designated by the Commission as "low

productivity" . The Commission has suggested that the Board take certain actions, whi ch are detailed in tlie June 20 , 1979, letter to Mr. Noel , attached as pages 2-3(c), 2-3(d), and 2-3(e) .

The University is requesting that the Board make use of the material a ttached as pages 2-3(f) through 2-3(i) in its response.

"LOW PRODUCTIVITY" PROGRAMS - UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN COLORADO The University of Southern Colorado is instituting in the Fall of 1979, a regular process of internal review of all degree programs on a five-year cycle. The programs scheduled for review in 1979-80 are the following :

Teacher Education Social Work

Basic Communications

Civil Engineering Technology

Manufacturing Engineering Technology Mechanical Engineering Technology Metallurgical Engineering Technology Music and Music Educa t ion

Some of these programs, namely Mechanical Engineering Technology , Metallurgical Engineering Technology , Music, and Music Education, appear in the reconm1endations of the Colorado Conuniss ion on Higher Education for monitoring by the Governing Board, dropping, or treating as options und er other degree programs.

Since the results of the internal program reviews will be reported annually to the Board, the University recommends that the Board defer any action pursuant to the Commission's recommendations until .internal review can be completed. The internal review of programs recoUU11endecl by the Commission to be dropped will be scheduled for 1980-81, and review of those recommended for monitoring by the Board and not reviewed in 1979-80 will be scheduled for 1981-82.

The guidelines for program review are included for the Board's info rmation. Thes e were developed by the University Curriculum Committee and reported to the Faculty Senate at its May , 1979, meeting. The Curriculum Committee is charged with the reviews and consequent recommendations.

We believe that the process is an orderly one and consistent with the Conm1ission ' s ultimate obj ectives, and that it should be allowed to go forward as planned.

Our comments on the specific recommendat ions of the Commission are as follows:

1) The University concurs with the Commission's reconm1endation that the Governing Board continue to monitor the following programs:

Mechanica l Engineering Technology BS Metallurgical Engineering Technology BS

Fine and Applied Art BA

Music BA Foreign Language Medical Technology Speech BA BS BA

We would call attention, however, to the fact that Mechanical Engineering Technology and Metallurgical Engineering Technology a r e programs clearly

targeted in the new role and mission of the University, and trust that the Board and the Commission will recognize that growth in these programs is anticipated , especially after occupancy of the ASET building . We would also cal l attentio n to the fact that the BA is in Art, no t "Fine and Applied Act " as s hown in the June 20 letter from the Commission . -~

i

2) The University has already indicated its intention to drop the following programs:

Office Administration BS

Science for Elementary Teachers BS

Business Education BA

Informal discussion with the Commission staff has indicated that the inclusion of the BA in Anthropology in this list in the June 20 letter was an error by the staff; the institution has not recommended dropping this program, nor does it recommend that now .

3) The University will study in the internal review process the Commission's recommendations to include as options und er other degree programs the following degree programs:

Music Education Art Education

Offer as Option Under Mus ic

Art (not Fine and Applied Art)

Further study will be needed to establish the impact of the suggested approach on the certification of teachers, among other matters.

4) Tentatively, subject to the review process, the University would recommend a different alignment from the Commission's suggestion for the following degree programs:

Geology & Geography

Offer as Option Under Geosciences

5) The University believes, subject to the review process, that as it becomes a polytechnic university, it should continue to give degrees in Chemistry and in Physics, and disagrees at this time with the Commission's recommendation that these become options under Physical Sciences. It also believes that, subject to the review process, the emphasis in the new role and mission on cultural pluralism justifies the granting of degrees in Anthropology, and disagrees at this time with the Commission's recommendation that these become options under Social Sciences.

The University also disagrees with the Commission's recommendations that the following degree programs be dropped immediately, and requests that any decision be deferred until after internal review in 1980-81:

Economics BS

Philosophy BA

Latin American Studies BA

DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION

COLORA~O

COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION

LESTER WOODWA ~D . Chairman

ANNE LAIRD MANVEL. Vico Chairman JUDY AAMAGAST

A. EDGAR BENTON El ME~ CHENAULT

J . TYLER MAKE ?E:ACE JACK LANG y MARQUEZ MICHAEL R. MOORE MICHAEL L. STRANG

Edmond

F.

Noel, Jr.

Chairman

State Board of Agriculture

617

State Services Building

Denver, Colorado 80203

Dear Mr. Noel:

1550 LINCOLN STREET. ROOM 210 DENVER. COLORADO 80203

June 20, 1979

Attachment VI

TELE : AREA 303 839-2 723

Dr. Kerschner's letter of June 20, 1978, concerning the review of existing

programs contained a list of programs that were identified on the basis of

having produced relatively few degrees over a three-year period. Governing

boards were asked to give a high priority to the review of these programs

and to repo rt on their findings to the Commission by April

15, 1979.

The Conmission has completed its analys is of the responses to this request and

has prepared the following recommendations for the consideration of the Board:

Concerning Colorado State University

On the basis of the info nnation provided, the Commission reco!Mlends that the

governing board continue to monitor the following degree programs :

Agricultural Economics

BS

MAg

Agricultural Journalism

BS

Avian Science

BS

Bio-Agricultural Science

BS

Farm and Ranch Management

BS

Horticul ture

Ph .D .

Food Technology

BS

Music

BA

Foreign Languages

MA

Sociology

MA

Ph.D.

Agri cul tura

1

Engineering

BS

Engineering Science

BS

Range Ecology

BS

Wood Science and Technology

BS

Con sumer Sciences and Housing

MS

Food Science and Nutrition

Ph.D.

Edioond F. Noel, Jr.

June 20, 1979

Page two

Occupational

Biochemistry

Entomol ogy

Physics

Statistics

Anatomy

Pathology

Therapy

MS

MS

Ph.D.

BS

BS

BS

MS

MS

Ph.D.

·-The Corrrnission recommends that the following degree programs be dropped and

that each program be offered as an option under another degree program :

Music Therapy

BA

Music Performance

BA

Distributive Education

BA

Trade and Industrial Education

BA

German

BA

Agriculture Industries Management

BS

The Commission recorrrnends that the following degree programs be dropped and

that no new students be admitted to them, effective fall 1979:

Art

Philosophy

MS

MFA

Concerning Fort Lewis College

On the basis of the infonnation provided, the Commission recommends that the

governing board continue to monitor the following degree programs:

Chemistry

Mathematics

Music

Physical Sciences

Southwest Studies

Spanish

BS

BA

BA

BS

BA

Bl\

The Commission recommends that the following degree programs be dropped and

no new students be admitted to them, effective fall 1979:

Business Education

Secretarial Science

AAS

BA

Concerriing the University of Southern Colorado

On the basis of the reasons given, the Corrvnission recommends that the governing

board continue to monitor the following degree programs:

. !

I :

'·

'. ;

I

•

/

-· Edmond

F. Noel,

Jr. June

20, 1979

Page three

·Mechanical Engineering

Me ta

11

u rg i cal

"

Fine and Applied Art

Music

Foreign Language

Medical Technology

Speech

Technology

II

BS

BS

BA

BA

BA

BS

BA

The Commi ssion supports the institution's decision to drop the following

degree programs:

Office Administration

Business Education

Science for Elementary Teachers

Anthropology

BS

BS

BS

RA

The Commission recommends that the following degree programs also be dropped

and that each program be offered as an option under another degree progrum:

Drop Degree In

Music Education

Chemistry

Geology

Physics

Anthropology

Geography

Art Education

BA

BS

BS

BS

BS

BS

BS

Offer as Option Under

Music

Physical Sciences

Social Sciences

Fine and Applied Arts

The Commission further recommends that the fo ll owing degrees be dropped and

that no new students be admitted to them, effective fall 1979:

Economics

Philosophy

Latin American Studies

Theatre

BS

BA

BA

BA

It

is the hope of th2 Cormiission that the Board of Agriculture will consider

these recornrnendatior1s in the near future and advise the Commiss ion of its

decisions regarding them by December

15,

1979.

If

the staff of the Conrnission can be of any assistance in clarifying these

recommendations, they will be happy to do so.

cc:

A. R.

Chamberlain

Rexer

Berndt

f11rnn•· Prdrnnn

Sincerely,

Lester Woodward

Chairman

Richard Pesqueira

I 0 0 r1 11 ,- . r ~ ,.. 1 .. ,,. ..

FIVE-YEAR PROGRAM REVIEW OPERATING PROCEDURES/GUIDELINES Operating Procedures

In November of each year, programs wi 11 be selected for revie1v the following year. 1) The programs selected for review (approximately 1/5 of the degree programs

at USC) will immediately begin a self-study. The self-study is designed to identify many aspects of each program and wi 11 address the guide] ines for program reviei,1 which arc attached herein. Ea ch program wi 11 be given one Yl' .•

to conduct and prepare the self-study and then submit it in September of the fol lowing year. A preliminary draft of the self-study shal 1 be submitted in early May prior to the submission of the final draft in September of the review year.

2) Fol lowing a review of the self-study in late September, early October

the University Curriculum Committee wi 11, in conjunction with the department head and School Dean responsible for the program, select a five-member

review team. The selection of the team wi I 1 be as follows:

A.

One department head from the Schoo 1

_.

B. One faculty member from the School

c.

Two faculty members of Schools other than that of the reviewed program D. One tacul ty member from the program.

The Dean of the School shall appoint the department chairman from the School (not a program member). The department chairperson will select a faculty member from the School (not a program member).

The UCC wil 1 appoint two outside faculty members and the departmental faculty wil 1 select the faculty member from the program be ing reviewed. This team is to be seated by tJovember 1 of the review year.

3) The review team will revie1--1 the self-study and hea r requests and

recommendations from UCC for further information concerning the self-study, if any.

~) The review team wil 1 conduct

study as it deems necessary. UCC in Jan1Jary of the review

interviews and explore the data in the self-The 'team will report its findings to the year.

5) The UCC wi:J revie1v the self-study and the team ' s findings and rec~mmcndation

and submit a draft of preliminary findings and recommendations to the departments and Deans.

6)

Each reviewed program wi 11 then, if necessary, respond to the pre] iminary findings and rebutt the UCC's recommendations, if necessary (in ·writing).

t

I

I I '-' t ' - ._. • ' ' '-'"'::J ' ~ ' " ' ,..._.. '

-Operating Procedures/Guide! ines Operating Procedures - 2

7)

The UCC·then submits the final draft of its recom~endations to the

depart men t, the Dean of the School and the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

8) The recommendations from UCC will be of the followi ng ty pe, with justificati on:

A. Recommend program be expanded

B. Recommend the program be maintained at same level

C. Recommend the program be maintained at a decreased level D. Recomme nd prog ram termination

9) The responsibility for carrying out the recommendation I ies with the Dean of the School in which the program is located and with the Vice President

for Academic Affairs at USC. Recommendation wi I I be effective Fa! I Semes ter of the fol lowing academic year, where applicable.

Guidelines for Progr.:irn Administration 1n ConduC(in <J Your Program Se lf-St udy_

. (Al 1 statistical data should be available from Craig Conly and all financial dat.:i should come from the Office of Business and Finance.)

Please report the following . information in as simple a form as possible:

1 . The objectives of you r program, and how your statement of objectives was prepared or validat ed (stater.ien t s by professional associ.:itions, industry groups, accrediting agencies, certification agencies, etc.).

2. How the cou r ses or student experiences in the program accomplish the objectives (correla te cour ses with objectives).

3.

Standards for .:idmission to the program, and standa rds for successful completion.

4.

The number of students in the past three years (by year): --admitted to the program

--dropping out of the program --completing the progr am

--placed in jobs for which the program prepared them --placed in jobs in othe r fields

_.

--conti nu in g to a higher level of education

5.

FTE generated and HEGIS code requirements (three years).

6.

Trends in enrollment and job placement as you project them for the next five years.

]. Ratings, statements of programmatic concerns, or evaluat ions of the courses, faculty, and of the entire program by:

current students graduates

8.

Support services (such as placement) offered to students.

9. Credentials and qualifi cations of the faculty an d support staf f.

10. Faculty t eaching and advisement loads and other activities (three years).

11. Professional developme nt or other growth activities of the faculty for a three-year period.

12. Ratings, statements of programmatic concerns, or evaluations of the program by the fa cu 1 ty.

13. Result s of any accr edi tation or program approval processes applicable to your fiel<l (plea se includ e an y applicabl e types of accreditation or program approval which you r program does not have, and whether or not you feel

use

should have it).

14. Fin ancia·l data for the last three year ~ : (contact Offi ce of Business and

Finance)

I .

Five-Year Program Review

Operating Procedures/Guide] ines Gui de Ii nes - 2

budget granted amounts spent

15.

Your perception of services provided to the program by other units of the University:

LRC

Administration Student Services Other

16. A summary needs assessment:

What top priori ty changes would you recommend? Why are these top priority What second priority changes would you recommend?

If these changes came about, what would be the benefit to USC student s and the State of Colorado?

POLICY NO. 4 USC Agenda Page 2-4

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979

~~P~

Approved

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Approval of Proposed Degree Programs, B.S. and A.A.S., in Computer Science Technology

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

MOVED, that the State Board of Agriculture approve and forward to the Colorado Commission on Higher Educ a tion t he proposal of a Bachelor of Science degree program in Computer Science Technology at the University of Southern Colorado. Further, that the Board reaffirm approval of the existing Associate in Applied Science degree program in Data Processing and approve changing the name of that program to Computer Science Technology.

EXPLANATION:

The proposal of a baccalaureate degree in Computer Science

Technology at the Univers i ty of Southern Colorado has been under discussion for many months. The proposed curriculum has been approved by the University Curr iculum Committee and the Faculty Senate. Copies of the proposal will be mailed to Board members separately from the agenda. Included here for the Board's information is a joint statement of the pertinent deans at the University of Southern Colorado and the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs which was presented to the CCHE i n

CCHE Agenda Item IV, 0, l

July

13, 1979

Attachment A

Page

1

JOINT STA TEMENT

SUPPORTING

THE

PROPOS ED DEGREES:

B.S .

in Computer Science

B.A./B.S.

in Co mput er Scie nce Technology

MICHAEL 0.

CILETTI

Assoc iate Dean

College of Engineering

and Applied Science

University of Colorado

at Colorado Springs

June

1, 1979

RAY L.

SISSON

Dean

School of Applied Science and

Engineering Technology

JO INT STATEMENT

CCH E Agenda Item IV, D. l

July 13, 1979

Attachment A

Page

-2

The B.S. degree in Computer Science that has been proposed by UCCS

and the B.A./B.S. degree in Compute r Science Technology that has

been proposed by USC a i·e dist i net degrees. Their deve 1 opment is

consistent with the distinct mission of each institution: USC has

been urged to devel op into a polytechnic university emphas i zing

applied sciences, engineering technologies, business, and health

curr icula. UCCS has the mission of becoliling a comprehensive

Master' s degree granting university offeri ng a broad program i n the

liberal arts and selected professional programs in business,

educa-tion and engineeri ng.

The B.S. degree in Computer Science proposed by UCCS and the B.A./B.S.

degree in Computer Science Technology proposed by USC will serve the

State of Colorado by addressing important curriculum needs. While

the two institutions are geographically prox imate, progranrnatic and

mission distinctions wi l l enable the programs to be offered in a

complementary and non-competitive manner.

~-1. HOW ARE THE PROPOSED DEGREES DISTINCT?

The B.S. degree in Computer Science as proposed by UCCS is a four

year (136 SCH) degree program emphasizing conceptual and theoretical

aspects of computers . The B.A./B.S. deg ree in Computer Science

Tech-nology as proposed by USC is a four year (122 SCH) degree

program--emphasizing app l ied and practical aspects of the state-of-the-art in

the field of computers.

2. HOW ARE THE CURRICULA DISTINCT?

The UCCS program is based on a highly nhlthematical core of required

courses emphasizing the theory of computation. Mathematic courses

are required in Calculus, Linear Algebra, Differenti al Equations,

Discrete Mathematics and Numerical Anfilysis. Calculus-based Physics

is req uired. The computer science courses require knowledge of

advanced mat hemati cs and arc taught from a mathematical perspec tive.

Theoretical and

conce~tual

models of computers are studied to develop

a scientific bac kground that enables them to understa nd t he operation

of computers, develop nevi computer sys terns, understand and apply

computers to the solut ion of engineering an d other problems , and

develop new langua ges for advanced applications. The depth of

under-standiT)g required by this degree program wi ll permit its graduates

to funct io n successfully in research and development pos iti ons related

to computers , and to pursue advanced degrees along traditional lines.

CCHE Agenda

Item

IV, D, l

July 13, 1979

8_t_t_a_c_h~e_n_t_ ~

Page 3

2

The USC program requ ires Algebra,

Tr igonon~lry

and Introduction to

Calculus, an d includes non-calculus based Physi cs . The computer

science technolo9y courses emphasi ze t he communication links between

human and machine including contemporary and emerging l anguages ,

pro-grarTTTiing and documen t ation with a goal of providing graduates \vho can

apply the computer to provide industrial managers with informa tio n

necessary to make better and

n~re

timely dec isions, control operations

and assist in forec as t ing and planning fo r future growth .

3. WHY ARE BOTH DEGREES NEEDED?

Both degrees are needed to provide graduates for a growing, broad

spectrum of career opportunities ranging from the operation of today's

computers , to prograITTning for an expanding range of usage, to the

design and development of tomorrow's computers and their languages.

Proposals from each institution incl ude strong indications that

qualifi ed personnel in both categories will be in heavy demand in the

foreseea ble fut ure.

The anala gous di st inction betwee n engineering degrees and engi neering

!_~~h~_ql_o~y

degrees applies to the proposed progra ms . Engineers are

vitally needed i n

to~ay's

techno l ogical society, and the execut ion of

their wo rk requi res a myriad of supporting personnel , including

engi-neering technologist. Jus t as the enginee ring technologi st supports

the activi ties of t he eng ineer , the computer science technologist has

an educat ional bac kground that enables him or her to not only support

the activit ies for the comp uter scientist, but, to

enga~e

in major

career opportunities whe re in the computer science technologist functions

independently .

4. HOW

lX)

USC AND UCCS FACULTY NEEDS DIFFE R IN SUPPORT OF

THE PROPOSED DEGREES?

Accrediti ng agencies for technol ogy programs generally recognize the

Master's degree as the terminal degree with on the job exper ience an

added requ irement. On the other hand, the UCCS degree in computer

science will requ i re tha t permanent fac ulty have obtained the Ph.D

degree.

5. WHAT OTHER PROGRAMMATIC DISTINCTIONS EXISTS?

The Assoc ia tion of Public Co l lege and University Presidents (APCUP)

have util i zed a HEGIS taxonomy for the purpose of recorrmending

appro-priate levels of fac ulty support for academic programs. The HEGIS

ta xonomy for USC's de gree in Computer Science Tcchno lo:iy is #51, Data

Processing Technolo9y. The HEGIS ta xonomy for UCCS's Computer Sc ience

degree is #7, Comp ute r and Information Sciences . The HEGIS ta xonomy

recogniz es

di sti n c t ion~.

bct1-1ccn

cn<Ji11L~erin9

,111ll

cn~1iner.rin~1 t echnolo~1y

programs, and be tween computer sc ience and compuler science technology

programs. Applic c1tio n of differen t llEG IS classifications to these

CCHE Agenda Item IV,

0, 1

July

13, 1979

Attachment A

---

_{Page 4}

6. WHAT INSTITUTIONS OFFER SIMILAR PROGRAMS?

On the national level, the USC Computer Science Technology program

3

is similar to such programs at Indiana University-Purdue University

(Ft. Wayne}·, Oregon Institute of Technology, Memphis State University,

Lake Superior State College, Chilt tanooga State Technical College and

Milw~ukee

Institute of Technology. In Colorado, the program is

similar to the program at Metropolitan State College. Articulation

beb-1een this program and the data processing programs in several

community colleges has been accomplished. The UCCS Computer Science

degree program is similar to degrees offered by the University of

Illinois, University of California (Berkley), M.l.T., Northwestern,

and other universities. In Colorado, the Colorado State University

and the Air Force Academy of fer undergraduate baccalaureate degrees

in Computer Science.

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979 2-5

~J?~

Approved

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Proposal for Developing an Educational Center in Fremont County

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

MOVED, that the State Board of Agriculture approve and forward to the Colorado Conunission on Higher Education the proposal of the University of Southern Colorado for developing an Educational Center in Fremont County.

mcPLANATION:

The Colorado Commission on Higher Education r econunended to the Board in March, 1979, that th e Board consid er developing an Educational Center in Freraont County, under the "extended campus" concept now in force at Metropolitan State College and the community colleges. Under this concept, Resident Instruction credit is given for off-campus coursework.

The proposal reconnnends a phased approach to the development of a Center, points out some of the difficulties of such development, and provides a plan for development . Copies of the proposal will be available at the meeting.

POLICY NO. 5 USC Agenda Page 4-1

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979

Approval

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Approval of University of Southern Colorado's FY-1980/81 Capital Construction Budget Request

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

MOVED, that the Board approve the University of Southern Colorado's FY-1980/81 Capi tal Construction Budget Request.

EXPLANATION:

The University's Capital Construction Budget Request consists of six projects with a combined total of approximately 2.6 million dollars, as per the attached sununary. The projects are consistent with the University's Facilities Master Plan.

USC Agenda SBA 9/20/79

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN COLORADO

CAPITAL CON.3TRl.K:TION Burx;ET REOUEST

FY-193J/&l

1.

ti)YCABLE

EQUIPt"ENT - OCCUPATIONAL TECHfJOLCGY FACILITY

I I I •

$909. 900

To provide instructional equipment necessary for the

programs moving into the new facility, replacement of

equipment for which ownership was transferred to PVCC,

moving costs and installation charges of all equipment.

2.

lfTILITY EXTENSION

FOR

OCCUPATIONAL TEO~JOLCXJY FACILITY , , , •

$315. 710

This project will extend the next phase of the central

utility distribution system loop on Belmont campus to

serve the Occupational Technology Facility presently

under construction.

3.

PHYSICAL PL.Pm MAINTENAi'JCE FACILITY •• , • , , •• , • , •• $831. ns

With completion of the Occupdtional Technol ogy Facility

under construction and the move of PVCC programs to Onnan

campus, this facility will allow the achievement of the

goal of vacating the leased "Truck Town" facility.

Physical Plant maintenance and operations for the University

are currently housed in the leased facility some five miles

from campus. The effectiveness of operations ·would 9reatly

improve with relocation to permanent maintenance facility

on the Belmont campus.

4.

CO"'PLETIOi~

OF AIR COfIDITIONING IN THE PSYCroLCXJY/CLASSR00'1

BUILDING

I I I • I I • • • • I I • t I I I I I I f I I I I I I

$54,288

5.

ItITEGRATED DRAWAGE SYSID1 - PHi\SE IV ••

I • • I I • • I I I

$406 ,000

The first three phases of the Integrated Drainage System

Master Plan have been completed. The completion of this

phase of the project will totally complete the Master Plan

and afford all of the campus structures with the protection

provided with the drainage system. Until such time as the

Master Plan is completed, the structural integrity of some

of

the campus facilities is still subject to damage due to

the extreme vo11t1lc heaving soils conditions.

6.

~QUTECn.RAL

ACCESSIBILITY

I • I I I • I I • I I • I I • • I

$85,975

This project is 1n keeping with the institution's goal of

providing accessible facilities for the handicapped and will

deal mainly with revisions to individual facilities, i.e.,

restroom alterations, telephone locations, drinking fountains,

door hardware and power door operators.

P 0 L I C Y I S S U E S

SBA SYSTEM

P 0 L I C Y I S S U E S

POLICY NO. 6 PVCC Agenda Page 1-1

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979 Pueblo Voc~tional Community College

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Approved

Approval of 1980-81 Pueblo Vocational Community College budget request.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

MOVED, that the State Board of Agriculture approve the Pueblo Vocational Community College 1980-81 budget request.

EXPLANATION:

The 1980-81 Pueblo Vocational Community College budget request consists of two part s.

Part I is consis t ent with the corrununity college budget assump-tions. This part of the budget request contains a 15% salary increase fo r all professional staff and a maximum.of 15% in all other categories, except capital outlay and extraordinary items. I n addition, Part I will contain an increase of 59 FTE students. The additional student increase will create a 44% i ncr ease in general fund dollars . However, at a continuing enrollment level, the general f und increase is only 12.9% Part II of t he budget request will be limited to a 7% increase as requested by the Office of State Planning and Budgeting. The budget will be mailed to all Board members by September 28, 1979.

POLICY NO. 7 PVCC Agenda Page 1-3

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979 Pueblo Vocational Community College

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

Capital Construction Request for Academic Year 1979-80. RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Approved

MOVED, that the State Board of Agriculture approve the Capital Construction Request.

EXPLANATION:

The Capital Construction Request of $527,855 will be available September 28, 1979, and consists of the following:

1. Renovation of the Trade

&

Industrial and Administration Buildings.

2. Renovation of the Vocational-Technical Building. 3. Replacement of the Central Heating Plant.

4. Site-work: walkways, roadways, diesel shop. 5. Campus l ighting .

6. Landscaping.

The renovation of the Trade

&

Industrial, the Administration, and the Vocational-Technical Buildings has been approved for federal vocational funds in the amount of $154,191. The total requested for these projects is $314,676. The federal vocational funds represent 49% of this total. An additional $160,485 to match vocational funds is needed so that the projects can proceed and another $213,179 for projects 3 through 6 is requested.

P 0 L I C Y I S S U E S COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY

CSU Agenda 1- 2

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979 Col orado State University

MATTERS FOR ACTION:

POLICY NO. 8

Land: Resolution of title defects in land parcels conveyed to the City of Fort Collins from the B. B. Harris and M. A. Harris Tracts of the Foothills Campus

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

MOVED, That the following recommended action submitted by the Vice President for Finance and approved by Legal Counsel be and is hereby approved:

The State Board of Agriculture agrees in principle with the City of Fort Collins proposal to resolve the boundaries of Water Treatment

Pl ant No. 2 generally in accordance with existing fencelines and as

described on the attached legal description, thereby fulfilling the earlier intent of the State Board of Agriculture to transfer a total of 50.91 acres to the City. The President and Secretary of the Board are authorized to sign appropriate legal documents, to be prepared by the City of Fort Collins, upon the recommendation of University Legal Counsel.

EXPLANATION:

The attached letter from the City of Fort Collins explains the title defects which have accumulated since 1926 and the need to agree mutually to common boundaries. University staff have verified that

the cumulative intent of all previous transactions was to transfer a total of 50.91 acres to the City for Water Treatment Plant No . 2 . The City retained ·a licensed surveyor to resurvey the boundaries and

they will fall generally one foot outside the existing fencelines

although some fencing will have to be removed from University property. The attached map shows the general location of the lands in question . Copies of the survey plat will also be available during the meeting as required.

,

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979 ~Colorado. ~tate Un~versity

'/ , . ; ' . ·J,:. --... '\\

- '\ ·,,. . j .. .

- ·-

--... -.. _,,,--·

---~

' ~ .... .,,,,,,,,,.._..._ ~ .... ...

---

' ... ~

' ·

~ ~~

-·

( ~----~~--

._,

__

.

., ____ .:;] . -

--

/ ....

,

---

-

--·-...

~~--""!...

-1•""-'"' .,.-_ .... :": ...

~-.e..._...__....__.__.t's-.~-·

_-- .... ·· · --- - - · -···-- --- .. · ·-·- - .. _ .. ·-·-·- - . _{• - -- - - - - - - - - - -· _..,.,, ·• ""'"'h • ...} .. _{_,_,_v}

'j

OF FORT COLLINS P. 0 . UOX ~> 80. FOST CO LLI S, COi Of\/\DO 6057.2 PH (303) 484 -4720

ilt--.aW ..£.'"S!!llr".-.!...,~._ ... _ _ _ .,.LW._.. _ _ _ _ ~ ... .,,...&*"'"'91' q~-~s:.wa_.::-~-S:r""..slis--~"9P' 5

-.. --... -==,.,.

Mr.

Dave M:::Cl:intock

Assistant to

the

Vice

President for Finance

Colorado State University

Fbrt Collins, Colorado

80523

Dear Dave:

June

8, 1979

In

resp:mse to your letter request of

~..ay 31,

I will atterrpt to sunrnarize

details

and

events :r:ertinent

to

the legal .description of our mutual roundaries

adjacent

to

our Water Treabrent Plant

No. 2.

In 1926

the City purchased from the

Board

of Agriculture

24.21

acres

(com-putes to

24.27

acres with a

2

feet closure error) of lill1d for a water storage

reservoir. The eastern :portions of this property are fenced today, and rrost

likely were fenced irrmediately after the purchase. Recent efforts to locate

property corners in this parcel have resulted in a discovery of legal

descrip-tion errors. Then:! are three problems associated with this descripdescrip-tion:

1) the l:oundary fails to close;

2) the sections in this area were reportedly resurveyed

in 1953

by the USGS; and

3)

the described parcel lies sarre

500

feet south of and

50 feet east of

the

agreed up:m and fenced lands.

The City subsequently purchased four additional parcels of land; approximately

3.56

acres

in

O:::tober

1963

(roundary does not close);

18.05

acres in O::::tober

1963: 1.20

acres

in Sept~-nber 1967;

and

3.94

acres in

1978.

The sll!m'Btion

' of

th:=

areas of all parcels (as computed from the legal descriptions) intended

for sale

to

the City (as nearly as the surveyors can estimate) is

50.91

acres.

When the

1963

purchase was negotiated it appears that an attempt was made on

the bargain and sale deed

to

correct the

1926

p:::>rtion of the legal description.

We

have no records which describe

the

intent of this docurrent. Furthcrn-ore,

a 2.7 feet closure error still exists in the

1926

parcel,

0.8

feet in the

3.56

acre

1963

parcel and the areas of the parcels were reduced

to 23.78

and

3.45

acres resp:::ctively. (The

0.6

acre difference between the sums of the

t.-.D

areas as stated

in the deed and that corrputed betsed on the legal descriptions

may

have sorrcthing to do with the

1926

description

~ing

ba.scd on t11e original

section bre.:W:lown and the subs<XfUe:nt descriptions bc:ing ba.sed on the

1953

section as resurveyed.) All ende.:ivors to clarify this problem to date have

only resulted in discovery of rrore unkno.vns.

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979 Colorado State -University

Page 2

Mr.

Dave M::::Clintock

June 8, 1979

Certainly it is in our mutual interest

to

eliminate these discrepancies

and

ambiguities at this tirre. In order that this could

be

accomplished , the City

res retained M

&

I .Engineering

to

resurvey the external

boundary

as outlined

by existing fences. \\·e would propose

to

the Eoard of rigriculture that the

bourrlary

and legal description shown on the M & I drawing dated June 6, 1979,

·be

accepted in place of all previous sale deeds.

The

prop::>sed boundary is generally 1 foot outside of

the

City's fences

be-cause of general agreement that the fence maintenance resFQnsibility

belongs

to the

City. The internal acreage based on this proposed

arbitrated boundary is still 50.91 acres. Also this description m:Jre

accurately reflects our mutually established use of these lands than do

the

erroneous legal descriptions.

If this prop::>sal is acceptable

to

the Eoard of Agriculture, the City will

have the appropriate legal docurrents drafted for signc.l.ture of those persons

so designated

by

the Board as its authorized representative for said natter.

I hope .this narrative along with the proposed plat and legal descriptions

will provide sufficient info:r:ITB.tion for a decision by the Eoard.

cc: Poger E. Krempel

Dick Hollar

D::>n Deagle

/kd

7)~

(),/J

#}

UVvL0L~1r;~~

Curtis W. Miller

COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY,. FOOTHILLS CAMPUS

LAND TRACT MAP

//

__.r-I

:

_{· ~}

·i

l

. -

~

; - / 11c r st10,fh , /

----~

·

. / " _,,,...

V

i c. _ _ .. ..,,,..,.-··01u"Cof\af ~~··•N

)

Christ ie 4020 • _ _,. ... .._.1 ;r.ts

!

>

.

I . .

1

r \

~

·

RESERVOI R

._j

Thomas 4010 '

\

/'"·

_\...-··

...) Fol con Or.

~

\_ _,.

I

_\

_~

··--··

l \

I oportt "·~t '

\_ ___ T

\

I 1--~

(

1.F. S.SL.A. While (. 4006 4004 ( • PltO\Ont Vol1_t/

ord la"• to11ol

.

( '

.. __ J;

__./.· Silvoire 400:5

"'""

D•. o--N-c-f (")Cf) 0 o:i >-"

>

0 t1 :::?:: Ill (1) p. rt> 0 rt ~· Ul ::I rt OQ Ill I rt Ul (1) (1) ' c:

-g

~. ~ < O-rt> (1) t1 t1 (/) ~· N rt 0 '< v

CSU Agenda 1-3

SBA ~eeting-September 20, 1979

Colorado Stat e university

.

-MATTERS FOR ACTION:

POLICY NO. 9

Irrigation : Con tract bet'Ween State Board of Agriculture and Lake Sherwood Ventur e pertaining to replacement of irrigation dit ch with underground pipeline

RECOMHENDED ACTION:

MOVED, That the following reconunended action submitted by the Vice President for Finance and approved by Legal Counsel be and is hereby approved:

The attached contract is approved and the Presiden t and Secretary of the Board are authorized to sign on behalf of the Board.

EXPLANATION:

Lake Sherwood Venture is presen tly developing a trac t of land west of the Rigden Farm through which an op en CSU irrigation ditch runs. The developers have requ ested , and CSU agrees, that the dit ch should be enclosed in an und erground pipeline. The developers have agreed to all the design modifications desired by the University. The attached con-tract specifies the terms of the und erstanding r eached and is recommended · for approval and signature.

SBA Meeting-September 20, 1979 Colorado State Jiniversity

THIS AGRED!ENT made and entered into on t his

_----

day of - - - • 1979, by and between LAKE SHER\.'OOD VENTURE , a Joint Venture, hereinafter referr ed to as the party of the fjrst par t, and COLORADO STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTL'RE, hereinafter referred to as the party of the second part, WITNESSETI!:

THAT WHEREAS, the party of the second part has an open ir r igation ditch commencing at a point East of the Lake Shen.rood Reservoir in

Section 30, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.~!., and continuing

Easterly over the railroad tracks of Union Pacific Railroad Compa ny, and used to furnis h water to the property of the party of the second part in Sec t ion 29, Township 7 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P . M.; and

WHEREAS, t he party of t he first part desires to construct an under-ground pipeline to replace said open ditch over and ac ross the same right-of-way as now occupied by the open ditch, and has prepared and submit ted to the party of the second part plans and specifications for the construction of €aid underground pipeline, together with a new weir as shown on said plans and specifications at the outlet of the Lake Sherwood Reservoir; and

WHERF..AS, each of the parties hereto has approved the plans and specifications attached hereto;

NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows:

The party of the first par t will construct an underground irrigation pipeline for the use of the party o f the second part, to oe con structed in the same location as the present open ditch which commences at the outlet of Lake Sherwood Reservoir and run s Southeasterly to the property of the party of the second part above desc r ibed; that the party of the firs t part will obtain and receive tl1e necessary permission from the Lake She1vood Homeowners' Association and from the Union Pacific Railroad Company to construct said underground pipeline over the properties owned by said parties .

The party of the first part further agrees that said construction shall be under the supervision of the engineers of each of the parties hereto, and shall be done in a good and workmanlike manner, in accordance with the plans and specifications attached hereto.

I t is further understood and agreed that the party of the first part shall guarantee the operation of said underground pipeline for two irrigat-ing sea sons after it is completed.

The construc t ion of said pipeline and other related facilities shown on the plan s and specifications shall be done at such time as will not interfe re with irrigation or other historic water uses conducted by the party of the second part on its property above described. In any event, construction of the pipel ine will be completed no later than April 1, 1930 .

SBA Mee t ing-September 20, 1979 Colorado State ~niversity

The party of the first part shall hold the party of the second part harmless and shall defend the party of the second part agai nst all claims by others for injury to persons or property resulting from tlte con s truc tion anJ operat ion of said underground pipeline and other related fa c ilities.

It is further und erstood and agree<l that the party of the first part will provide the party of the second part a deeded easement for the und e r-ground pip eline, together with the right to maintain said pipeline and will warrant ownership of t he property through which sai d easement crosses.

The laws of the State of Colorado and t he rules and regulations issued pursuant thereto shall be applied in the interpretation, execution and enforcement of t his contract.

The signatories to this contract aver tha~ to their knowl ed ge, no

employee of Colorado State Unive rs i t y has any personal or beneficial interest whatsoever in the propertv descri bed herei n. Furthermore , the signatories hereto aver that they are familiar wit h CRS 1973, 18-8-301, e t seq. (Bribery and Corrupt Influence) and with 18-8-401 et seq. (Abuse of Public Office) as amended, and t ha t no violat ion of such provisions is pre~ent.

In the event the party of the first part should default i n any of the covenants herein set forth so as to require the party of the second part to commence lega l or equi tabl ~ action against the party of the first part

for such de fault, the party of the first part agrees to pay all r easonable expense of litigation, including a reasonable sum for attorneys ' f es.

This agreement shall extend to and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the respect ive parties hereto.

IN WITNESS t.'H EREOF , the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year hereinabove f irs t written.

LAKE SHERWOOD VENTURE , a Joint Venture

By: EVERITT ENTERPRISES , INC .:

ATTEST: By - - - -_President

Joint Venturer Secretary

COLORADO STATE BOARD OF ACRICULTURC

Secretary

APPROVED AS TO FOR:-!:

J. M. Goldba=er

POLICY NO. 10 CSU Agenda 1-4

SBA }1eeting-September 20, 1979 Colorado State _Board of Agriculture

MATTERS FOR ACTION :

CSU Water Agreement: Amendment to the Operating Agreement between the State Board of Agriculture and the Nor thern Colorado Water

Conser vancy District RECO -ll-fENDED ACTION :

MOVED, That the following reconnnended action submitted by the Vice Pres ident for Finance and approved by Legal Counsel be and is hereby approved :

The a ttached Addendum to the Operating Agreement of July 13, 1979 is approved and the President and Secretary of the Board are authorized t o sign it on behalf of the Board.

EXPLANATION:

The Water District and University had agreed to incorporate Article 6 as shown on the attached Addendum but failed to do so in t he copies presented t o the Board for approval and sig nature at the June 21, 1979 Board meeting . Ar ticle 6 presently reads as follows:

6. (a) If any payment required to be made to the Conservancy Dis trict is not paid when due, the State Boa r d shall pay a penalty of one per centum (1. 0%) per month f r om

th~ date of delinquency.

(b) No water shall be delivered by the Conservancy Dis trict hereunder or under the water allotment contracts during any period in which the State Board is delinquent in any payments required of the State Board. Refusal to deliver water pursuant hereto shall not reduce or modifv. the State Board's obligation to pay for water delivereJ prior to any Notice of Delinquency from the Conservancy District .