The judge's previous order specified a 5-day jail term and a $1,000 fine per violation, but named only one individual who has since left the protest site.

Until the order is amended - if it is - protestors continue to lodge in trees at the site, and UC campus police continue to issue citations. To date, over 200 have been issued.

In the main (separate) trial over the stadium and high performance center issues before the Alameda County Superior Court, Judge Miller has asked attorneys for the various parties to draft proposed court orders for her consideration. She has requested those by October 26th.

We understand from university officials that a court ruling could possibly occur before the end of October, but given the short time period after the draft orders are received, a ruling is more likely to occur after the home football season is concluded on November 10th.

Some questions have been asked about the site visit the judge undertook on Thursday, October 4th. University officials say that the visit was requested by the judge merely for the purpose of getitng a visual picture of the sites involved, and did not involve any assessments by the judge of the appropriateness of the various project sites. CEQA law does require UC to have adequately described each of the alternative sites however, so that aspect may have been cosidered by the judge.

We are now told that UC is actively preparing for the steps to be taken immediately after the ruling, whether the ruling is in favor of UC or not.

As reported in earlier articles here, a ruling that UC's EIR was inadequate in some particulars would require UC to amend those portions of the EIR, and perhaps to recirculate it to affected parties- and hold public hearings- before re-certifying it.

It is possible, even likely, that the City of Berkeley would then file another lawsuit protesting details in the new EIR, but as attorney Charles Olson commented after the close of hearings October 11, a subsequent lawsuit over issues that have already been contested- or over amendments to the EIR that UC made to suit the judge's ruling- would be difficult to sustain, particularly if the same judge maintained jurisdiction over the case.

In the event of a second suit, plaintiffs would also have to obtain an injunction against project implementation or UC would be free to proceed with tree removal and project construction.

The second critical issue at trial has been whether the new athletic center constitutes a seismic retrofit or upgrade to Memorial Stadium, or is merely a separate and adjacent structure. The former would limit the amount of further funds UC would be permitted under seismic safety law to expend on the Memorial Stadium upgrade- the latter would not.

Yet even if the judge found that the former was the case, UC would still have the option of simply proceeding with the project- or moving or redesigning the athletic center as necessary to avoid the factors the judge cited when ruling that the two structures are indeed one.

The bottom line: EIRs can be amended and buildings can be moved or redesigned as necessary to satisfy the court, and once done (except for further legal proceedings), the project can proceed.

Thus the university officials we have spoken with do not foresee any court ruling that would be fatal to the project unless a completely unexpected (and not proposed by any party) ruling set a major precedent in the interpretation of the seismic safety law ("Alquist-Priolo"). To the contrary, the judge appears to be examining information supplied by UC's attorneys that A-P law might not even apply to state entities.

If there is no fatal ruling, the principal and tangible results of the lawsuits would be substantial project delays and construction cost increases, lawyer's fees, and large expenditures of time by city and university officials for essentially no gain.

©Copyright 2007, BearInsider.com and Scout.com. All rights reserved.

If you haven't done so already, subscribe to The Bear Insider so you can participate in this active online Cal community and get access to the members-only content from the nation-wide Scout.com network.

Bear Insider staff writers visit the Insider discussion board regularly, and are available to discuss questions you may have about this article and Cal Athletics.