Rock Talk Winter 2005

• Year: 2005
• Title: Rock Talk
• Author: Colorado Department of Natural Resources
• Description: Division of minerals and geology Colorado Geological Survey
• Publications - Doc Type: Other

Study Concerning Whether the CGS should move to the Colorado School of Mines
House Bill 04 -1359 required that a col-
laborative study be conducted by the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
and the Colorado School of Mines (CSM)
relating to the possible relocation of the
Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) and
the manner in which the Survey could
most effectively serve the needs of the
State of Colorado.
The bill required that both the DNR
and the CSM appoint four people to con-
duct this study. The appointments made
by DNR Executive Director Russell George
and CSM President John Trefny included:
Department of Natural Resources
• Shane Henry, Assistant Director of
DNR for Lands, Energy and Forestry
• Vince Matthews, Colorado State Geol-
ogist (CGS)
• Matt Sares, Manager of Environmen-
tal Geology Section (CGS)
• Patricia Schindler, Manager of Admin-
istration and Business Services (CGS)
Colorado School of Mines
• Murray Hitzman, Professor and
Department Head for Geology and
Geological Engineering
• Dan Montez, Associate Vice President
for Finance and Operations
• Terry Young, Professor and Depart-
ment Head for Geophysics
• Bob Weimer, Professor Emeritus and
Consultant
COLORADO
P P "r"t 4, P,
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
The Committee worked on the study
from early September to December. Dur-
ing this time the Committee:
• Held fourteen committee meetings;
• Met with the principals involved,
including Rep. Ramey Johnson, DNR
Executive Director Russ George, and
CSM President John Trefny;
• Held a public meeting to gather feed-
back on the proposed scope docu-
ment;
• Toured both the current space of the
Colorado Geological Survey in Den-
ver and key areas of the Colorado
School of Mines' campus;
• Worked with key personnel from
Mines and the Survey regarding issues
pertinent to the study such as space
and infrastructure needs (i.e. IT sup-
port); personnel - related items (i.e. dif-
ferences in personnel systems); library
capabilities; etc.;
The current and future location of the Colorado Geological Survey
• Created a dedicated Web site for the
study: http: / /www.is.mines.edu /fo/
Geo_reloc /;
• Had facilitated discussions on the spe-
cific items listed in the legislation;
• Conducted a study of the surround-
ing western states regarding how their
Surveys are currently structured;
• Documented the extensive collabo-
ration already existing between the
CGS and the CSM;
• Held a second public meeting to
gather feedback on the DRAFT report;
and
• completed the required report and
summary of public input and submit-
ted it to the legislature.
The committee studied the benefits
and disadvantages of three options:
1. No change in location or administra-
tive structure;
2. A physical change of location and a
change in administrative structure;
and
3. A physical change of location, but no
change in administrative structure.
Each of the three options has both
benefits and disadvantages for the DNR,
the CGS, and the CSM. While the com-
mittee reached a consensus that the CGS
should not become part of the admin-
istrative structure of the CSM, the com-
mittee was unable to reach a consensus
view on a possible physical relocation
of the CGS to the Mines campus.
The Final Report of the completed
study is located online at http: / /www.
is.mines.edu/fo/Geo—reloc/.
CGS ROCKTALK Vol. 8, No. 1