First, full disclosure:I’m an unabashed football fan. What’s good for the University of California Golden Bears is good for me. But reasonable people of any persuasion have got to admit that what’s going on in Berkeley is a case of the inmates running the asylum.
The background: the U of C was founded in 1868, in empty land north of Oakland, and a city grew up around it. In 1923 they built a gorgeous football stadium, called by Sports Illustrated the most beautiful place in the country to take in a game. But its facilities (locker rooms, training rooms, meeting rooms) are cramped and deteriorating, and a detriment to recruiting. And its built on an earthquake fault.
So the U put together a plan to remodel, in 2 phases: (1) new, expanded facilities (including classrooms) adjoining the stadium, and (2) a seismic retrofit for the stadium. They performed all the required seismic studies and environmental impact reports; raised money privately; and got the Regents to sign off.
And that’s when the loonies came out of the woodwork. No fewer than 4 lawsuits were filed to halt the project. In decreasing order of sanity, they are:
The City of Berkeley. Their suit is based on seismic issues: they object to construction so near an earthquake fault, and argue that the city’s resources would be impacted should a natural disaster occur. Well jeez, guys…if you’re so concerned about safety, maybe you would get behind the effort to improve the existing facilities, to make them more earthquake-safe. The real issue, though, is that Berkeley does not like being a college town. They resent the University, and they hate the crowds that a football game brings in. The perfect solution from the city’s standpoint would be if the University tore down the stadium and built another one, in some other town. Football detracts from the city’s real mission – regulating nanotechnology.
The homeowners association. Again, citing seismic concerns, but in actuality it’s pure NIMBY behavior. They bought homes next to a football stadium, and now they’re annoyed if people actually want to use that stadium (6 times a year).
The California Oaks foundation. The expanded facilities would require removal of 40 oak trees from a grove adjoining the stadium. The University’s plans call for 3 trees to be planted for every one cut down. The trees are not unique or endangered (there’s about a billion of them in California), and it’s not a habitat for any endangered species. But, as of last December, we’ve got nutcases tree-sitting to protest the removal of these “ancient” trees. This is actually the most insidious of the protests, as it gets tons of coverage on the local news. They’re allowed to spread lies – unchallenged by the local media, so I pit them, too --that the trees are “hundreds” of years old, when they were actually planted at the time the stadium was built. So this protest is challenging the right of the University to maintain its own landscaping.
Save Tightwad Hill (this is classic). The hill overlooking the stadium provides surprisingly good sightlines, for free. It’s a Berkeley tradition for some “tightwads” to clamber up on the hill to enjoy the game. The stadium renovation will partially block those sightlines, unfortunately. Too bad, right? Buy a ticket? Naw – sue. An organization has been formed to block the construction, so that this group’s “right” to free football viewing will not be impeded.
Personally, I think #3 and #4 are just stalking-horses for #2.
If you think these suits were laughed out of court, you’d be wrong. A judge issued an injunction on Monday, stopping construction until the court case(s) are resolved. The delay will cost the University an extra $10 million.
Living in Davis, where the University/City relations are similar, I feel your pain.
All this frickin city and the “townies” do is bitch about students and how we’re ‘transient’ and don’t give a shit about the town. Well guess what? We live here too, and some people might stay here. If that University was gone, there would BE no City of Davis. See? City population: 65,000, University students: 30,000, not to mention all the employees, staff and faculty, etc
Granted, our hippies aren’t nearly as bad, but they try. Want to know how nosey we are? The City of Davis has challenged the building of a horse-racing track… in another town!
I’m a liberal and I love Berkeley, but the nuts definitely tend to dominate local politics there. I think it’s because they have the most time and energy to throw at stuff like this, and once they’re in, they make it less pleasant for normal people to be involved, because who wants to spend their free time arguing with a bunch of nuts?
Unfortunately, no matter what you do (or don’t do) in Berkeley, there’s bound to be someone against it. Usually they winge on and on about the ecosystem this or biodiversity that, but usually they have no idea what they’re talking about. For instance, tell them you’re going to cut down the eucalyptus grove and they’d go apeshit. But take the other tack and tell them that eucalyptus are non-native invasive species and they’ll howl for blood and demand that they be removed. It’s a knee-jerk reaction. No matter what it is, they’re against it.
I remember being at the Big Game last year, and we were all talking about how this might be the last year we’d see Tight Wad Hill. Should’ve known better-- this is Berkeley. I have to agree with the OP-- NIMBYism looks like the real reason.
Ah, Santa Cruz. Gotta love that quirky little town.
When I was in grad school at UC Santa Cruz, I considered founding the Santa Cruz branch of the John Birch Society. I was a right-wing nut there, because I wanted there to be more parking on campus…
Definitely true. I remember hearing about the people who were opposed to having a Trader Joe’s in Berkeley because “the sale of low-cost alcohol at Trader Joe’s would adversely impact their neighborhood.” Apparently they’re worried about what might happen if Cal students had too-easy access to Two Buck Chuck… :rolleyes:
Like there aren’t enough drunks wandering Telegraph as it is. Like Giraffe, I love Berkeley. From a distance, a place to visit occasionally. But I could never live there.
Quick question for you…are any of the students protesting the stadium reconstruction? From my experience, it seems that a hallmark of college-campus liberals is an intense resentment of football, and especially funds that go to it that they think should go to better places.
When I was in school at Cal about 20 years ago there was one election with a number of propositions on the ballot. The first one was a measure to become a sister city with a Palestinian refugee camp. And about 5 measures to change how rent control worked in Berkeley. There was tons and tons of press and money spent on the symbolic measure of sister city hood. The issue that would affect the lives of people in Berkeley in almost no way and I believe would affect the lives of the refugees in almost no way either. Almost no press on the rent control issues. Rent control and how it works affects almost every body in Berkeley in some way.
So it is an exciting change of pace to see people and the press caring about an issue that has some relevance to the lives of people in Berkeley.
