UC Berkeley News
Web Feature

UC Berkeley Press Release

California Memorial Stadium timeline

November 1922 Funded by private gifts, work on California Memorial Stadium begins under the direction of architect John Galen Howard. 
November 1923 Memorial Stadium completed in time for Big Game; landscaping project includes planting of some 90 oaks, coast live oaks, redwoods, and other trees near western wall.
1975 - 2008 UC Board of Regents adopts Seismic Safety Policy, prompting university-wide assessments of earthquake safety. Acting in accordance with the assessment, UC Berkeley has, to date, spent $325 million to address campus seismic issues
Summer 1997 New seismic evaluation finds stadium poses risk to users, needs extensive retrofit.
Summer 2002 New, temporary press box constructed above stadium's western stands to replace seismically hazardous press box constructed in 1960s.
June 2002 Campus begins work on a new Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) which will describe the scope of capital improvement and growth at UC Berkeley through the year 2020. 
January 2004 Chancellor Robert Berdahl announces plan to renovate 81-year-old Memorial Stadium, enhance facilities for student-athletes.
Fall 2004 Chancellor Robert Birgeneau establishes 30-member Memorial Stadium Advisory Committee to decide among three competing proposals for the southeast quadrant of the campus. The committee is officially charged with the task of improving the life safety of stadium occupants while providing safe and suitable new facilities for the university's student-athletes.
January 2005 UC regents approve 2020 Long Range Development Plan.
April 2005 Campus officials unveil "sweeping new vision" for southeast quadrant — the Southeast Campus Integrated Projects (SCIP) — anchored by stadium retrofit and new athletic-training facility.
November 2005

Chancellor Birgeneau announces master plan to refurbish Memorial Stadium, beginning with construction of $125 million Student-Athlete High Performance Center (SAHPC) that will be fully funded by private donors.

Campus publishes initial study checklist and Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Environmental Impact Report (EIR); 30-day public-comment period begins

Nov. 14, 2005 Notice of preparation (NOP) for project's Environmental Impact Report is published. One-month period of initial public review and comment begins.
Dec. 8, 2005 An initial public scoping meeting preceding the preparation of the draft EIR is held. (See material presented at the meeting.)
March 2006 Campus holds community open house to explain and discuss plans for California Memorial Stadium and southeast quadrant of campus. (See material presented at the meeting.)
May 8, 2006 Draft EIR on Southeast Campus Integrated Projects is published; 61-day public-comment period begins.
June 5, 2006 A public hearing is held on draft EIR.
July 2006 Geotechnical work begins to explore subsurface conditions near  Memorial Stadium and gather information for design and construction of proposed SAHPC.
Oct. 31, 2006 Campus publishes final EIR on southeast-campus projects; geological survey finds no active faults under SAHPC site.
November 2006 California Memorial Stadium listed in National Register of Historic Places.
Dec. 2, 2006 Two protesters begin occupation of trees in oak grove outside Memorial Stadium to prevent removal of 44 specimen trees.
Dec. 5, 2006 Regents consider and approve SAHPC project.
Dec. 11, 2006 City of Berkeley, Panoramic Hill Association, and California Oak Foundation file separate suits to block construction of SAHPC.
January 2007 Alameda County Superior Court Judge Barbara Miller issues preliminary injunction to halt removal of trees and construction of SAHPC pending outcome of litigation.
February 2007 Kent Lightfoot, curator of North American archaeology at Phoebe Hearst Museum of Anthropology, fully refutes protesters' claims that oak grove might be site of Indian burial ground.
May 2007 Second, independent geological survey by Geomatrix Consultants confirms there are no active faults under proposed SAHPC site.
July 12, 2007 Vice Chancellor Nathan Brostrom sends letter to Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates and City Council members updating them on the results of the geological surveys and outlining the proposed changes to the Integrated Projects. The communication includes an offer to decrease the number of parking spaces in proposed garage to replace lost parking only; commitment to replacing oak trees 3:1, with one being a large tree in a 72-inch container; and modifications of the design of the SAHPC. In addition, he states campus's strong interest in expediting the retrofit of California Memorial Stadium.
August 2007 In preparation for football season, campus erects temporary fencing around portion of oak grove to ensure safety of fans and protesters.
August 2007 Independent student-body senate (ASUC) passes resolution in support of university's proposed construction of athletic facility adjacent to Memorial Stadium:
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the ASUC expresses its support for the construction of the Student Athlete High Performance Center, phase 1 of the California Memorial Stadium Campaign."
Aug. 29, 2007 Mayor Bates issues statement expressing willingness to consider a mutually acceptable settlement if conveyed through the city's attorneys.
Aug. 31, 2007 University sends official settlement offer to city documenting those offers contained in its July 12 letter.
Aug. 31, 2007 University sends official settlement offer to city documenting those offers contained in its July 12 letter.
Sept. 4, 2007 Berkeley City Council rejects university's settlement proposal, refuses offer to engage in further discussion, and decides to proceed to trial.
September 2007 Judge Miller consolidates the three lawsuits.
September 2007 University receives report from independent archeological consulting firm, William Self Associates, Inc. After full review of all available records the lead investigator, James Allan, Ph.D., concludes that "there is no verifiable evidence for a burial ground at the site of the stadium."
Fall 2007 Athletic Director Sandy Barbour and Vice Chancellor Brostrom attend series of neighborhood meetings to provide community members with updated information about the SAHPC and stadium projects.
Oct. 1, 2007 University goes to court seeking clarity about whether the tree protest is, in some fashion, "protected speech." Superior Court Judge Richard Keller issues preliminary injunction against protesters, followed by ruling that campus can remove all tree-sitters illegally occupying the grove. The court's decision confirms that the protest is a dangerous, illegal occupation of university property and not in any way "protected speech" under the First Amendment.
Oct. 4, 2007 Judge Miller tours site.
November 2007 University erects second chain-link fence around grove in order to facilitate containment and management of the ongoing protest.
Feb. 20, 2008 Under supervision of UC police, arborists dismantle ropes and a wooden platform used by tree-sitters and supporters.
April 2, 2008 UCPD Chief Victoria Harrison writes open letter to students and campus community about the department's approach to the protest and the campus's commitment to bring it to a "safe but certain" end. More than 200 students respond in writing; 90 percent of responses express support for UCPD policy and goals.
June 13, 2008 As of this date, the UCPD has recorded over 286 violations of the law in connection with the protest; 92 resulted in custodial arrests of protesters and another 63 citations were issued at the site. Several injuries have occurred in the grove as a result of the protesters' conduct. Protesters have violated time, place, and manner rules regarding when and where free speech may occur on university property and have engaged in numerous forms of misconduct, including weapons-possession violations, robbery, theft, vandalism, assault, battery, battery to a peace officer, assault with a deadly weapon to a peace officer, violation of probation, violation of a campus exclusion order, violation of a court order, threats against a peace officer, resisting arrest, drug-possession violations, disturbing the peace, unlawful topping of trees, and public intoxication.
June 17, 2008 Under UCPD supervision, arborists sever supply lines connecting trees in the grove and dismantle structures in the branches. Protesters attack arborists and police officers with their stockpiled urine and feces. Two protesters are removed.
June 18, 2008

In a 129-page decision, Judge Miller rules overwhelmingly in favor of UC Berkeley, but asks for more information on design elements unrelated to SAHPC construction and proposed non-football uses for stadium.

Quotes from the decision:
• "the record contains substantial evidence that the area in which the Memorial Oak Grove exists does not contain sensitive biological resources" • "the university adopted feasible mitigation measures to avoid or lessen impact" of tree removal" and that "mitigation would ensure that the impact from loss of specimen trees, including coast live oaks, is less than significant"… "evidence in the record corroborates…the urban character of and the lack of sensitive biological resources in the area of the Memorial Oak Grove"… • "There is also no evidence in the record that any alleged burial sites or any other archeological resources in the Integrated Project area are unique archaeological resources" • The university's "EIR analysis of seismic impacts satisfies the University's CEQA obligation for investigation and disclosure of seismic impacts" • The ruling quotes officials from California's State Historic Preservation Office as commending the university's design for the atadium project, calling it a "breath of fresh air" while asking if they could "share the design with others as an example of how to approach a historic stadium" • "Evidence in the record demonstrates that the CMS is a valuable historic resource that is rooted deeply in the life of the university and that relocating it is, for the university, essentially unthinkable" • "The record contains substantial evidence supporting the university's decision to build the (athletic facility) as currently proposed."

June 23, 2008 The Daily Californian (Berkeley's independent student press) senior editorial board writes the latest in a series of editorials condemning the protest. Excerpts: • "Not only have the protesters hijacked hundred-year-old landscaping for disingenuous environmental protection, but they've also recklessly disregarded the safety of arborists, police and even themselves" • "There's no reasonable justification for them to remain among the branches for another day."
June 25, 2008 Two tree-sitters voluntarily descend. Concerned about health and safety of the remaining protesters, UCPD begins to supply them with essential amounts of food and water.
June 28, 2008 In new court filing, campus proposes to resolve outstanding legal issues by eliminating a proposed grade beam that was designed solely to prevent cosmetic damage to the stadium during SAHPC construction, and returning to existing agreements on non-football stadium events. In light of the concessions the university asks Judge Miller to let construction proceed.
June 30, 2008 Judge Keller rejects effort by protesters' attorneys to compel the university to stop all removal efforts and allow outside supplies of food in. He states that "the university has been very patient and I will not punish them for their patience," and adds, "when they are ready to drink or eat, they should just come down and get off the university's property." His decision states that "the university is authorized… to take any and all actions reasonably necessary to lawfully enforce any and all orders of this court relating to . . . the Memorial Stadium Oak Grove," and that "the denial of food and/or water to anyone, while that individual is occupying any property or properties included within the coverage of any of this court's orders…shall not be considered a violation of this order."
June 30, 2008 Berkeley City Council holds closed session on whether to initiate litigation against the university to remove the barricades on western edge of the oak grove from city sidewalks. Council takes no action on this matter, but does vote to send a letter to the campus asking that persons be allowed to provide food to tree-sitters.
July 1-6, 2008 Four more protesters voluntarily leave the grove; a new protester scales fence, joins others. A total of four are now in the trees.
July 8, 2008 After consultation with campus medical director, university announces plan to increase amount of food provided to tree-sitters to 1,800 calories per day
July 8, 2008 Vice Chancellor Brostrom responds to city's July 1 letter, describing the food and water provided to protesters by university police and restating its intention not to allow outside individuals to provide food, water, or supplies to the tree-sitters, per court order.
July 14, 2008 Most recent person to join the protest comes down voluntarily due to death in his family. UCPD agrees to "cite and release" him.
July 17, 2008 Judge Miller holds hearing on university's request for immediate modification of the injunction that would allow construction of SAHPC to commence. She goes on the record twice to remind all parties that her June 18t court ruling has determined that the university is the "primary prevailing party" in the litigation.
July 22, 2008 Judge Miller rules in the university's favor on every outstanding issue and clears the way for SAHPC construction to start. However, she decides that her initial injunction will remain in place for seven more days, providing petitioners with opportunity to appeal.
July 23, 2008

Protesters manage to run an aerial supply line from the grove across Piedmont Avenue to another tree on campus. Faced with severe safety hazard, UCPD reaches agreement with protesters that leads to the line's removal.

Under the terms of the agreement, protesters and their supporters will: • Vacate a second tree they had occupied • Lower human waste they had been stockpiling for possible future use against police officers and/or arborists • Continue to lower waste on a daily basis • Cease all efforts to storm, disrupt, or dismantle barricades surrounding the grove • Cease all efforts to force food supplies in to the enclosed area.

For its part, the university agrees to: • Allow one of two people who joined the protest yesterday to come down without facing arrest or citation for his actions • Allow supporters to supply protesters with one bag of food daily • Give 72 hours notice if the university intends to end this agreement • Give 72 hours notice if the university intends to forcibly remove any of the tree-sitters.

July 24, 2008 Two petitioners, the Panoramic Hill Association and the California Oak Foundation, file notice of appeal with California Court of Appeals. Under statute the existing injunction is automatically extended for 20 days, until Aug. 13.
July 24, 2008 Berkeley City Council decides not to appeal Judge Miller's decision to let UC Berkeley begin construction of SAHPC. However, council holds open option of revisiting decision after return from summer recess.
Aug. 1, 2008 University submits to Court of Appeals its response to petitioners' request for review of Judge Miller's ruling and an indefinite extension of the injunction. The university asks that the court require petitioners to post a $28 million bond to indemnify the university against financial damages in the event that the appeal is not successful.
Aug. 8, 2008 Declaring the petitioners' appeal "premature," the state Court of Appeals sends the case back to the trial court and leaves in place an injunction against construction of the proposed Student-Athlete High Performance Center for at least a few more weeks.
Aug. 15, 2008 Plaintiffs withdraw their motion for retrial.
Aug. 21, 2008 Arborists supervised by the UC Police Department remove a limited number of branches — about an hour's worth of work — from three trees in the grove where the protest by tree-sitters continues. The work was done to aid UCPD's ability to maintain safety and security in the area, as students begin to move into residence halls this weekend and the fall semester at UC Berkeley gets under way.
Aug. 26, 2008

Alameda Superior Court Judge Barbara Miller issues her final decision in the lawsuit, confirming the substance of a ruling she made July 22 that supported UC Berkeley's position on every significant point. The ruling accepts changes the university has made to the project in response to the court's June 18 ruling, including removal of a grade beam and an agreement by the university to withdraw a proposal for staging non-football events at the stadium.

Judge Miller also accepted the university's binding promise to refrain from construction activities at the site pending word from the Court of Appeal about when and if the campus may proceed. By accepting this arrangement, Judge Miller agreed that it is not necessary to continue the existing injunction.

Aug. 27, 2008

The California Oak Foundation and stadium neighbors in the Panoramic Hill Association file an appeal of Judge Miller's ruling with the California Court of Appeal.
Sept. 4, 2008 The California Court of Appeal "summarily denied" requests that it impose additional stays or a new injunction on UC Berkeley, effectively clearing the way for the university to begin construction of the new student-athlete center.
Sept. 5, 2008 In the wake of a California Court of Appeal ruling denying requests for additional delays, UC Berkeley begins clearing the site adjacent to California Memorial Stadium today, making way for construction of a new student-athlete center. Four protesters remain isolated in one tree.
Sept. 8, 2008 Arborists nearly complete clearing the site of the new student-athlete center. All trees slated for removal are been taken down, save for one redwood tree designated for transplanting, and another redwood where four protesters continue to occupy the few remaining top branches.
Sept. 9, 2008

The last four protesters climb down from their perch atop a redwood tree outside Memorial Stadium, peacefully ending a 21-month tree-sit to protest construction of the student-athlete training center.