Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
118564960
label
[Education] - The Peopleäó»s Park, 07/01/1969
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
118564960
contentType
document
title
[Education] - The Peopleäó»s Park, 07/01/1969
citationUrl
identifierLocal
840
collections
Ronald Reagan's Governor's Papers of the Press Unit
Reports
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
118564960
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-12-31
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1967-01-01
year
1967
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
fff06dc1c6380774
ocrText
Ronald Reagan Presidential Library
Digital Library Collections
This is a PDF of a folder from our textual collections.
Collection: Reagan, Ronald: Gubernatorial Papers,
1966-74: Press Unit
Folder Title: [Education] - The People's Park, 07/01/1969
Box: P34
To see more digitized collections visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/archives/digital-library
To see all Ronald Reagan Presidential Library inventories visit:
https://reaganlibrary.gov/document-collection
Contact a reference archivist at: [email protected]
Citation Guidelines: https://reaganlibrary.gov/citing
National Archives Catalogue: https://catalog.archives.gov/
PRESS
THE "PEOPLE'S PARK"
A REPORT ON A CONFRONTATION
AT
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA
SUBMITTED TO GOVERNOR RONALD REAGAN
OF
GREAT THE SEAL...OFA THE OF F
CALIFORNIA
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
JULY 1, 1969
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE "PEOPLE'S PARK"
A Report on a Confrontation
at
Berkeley, California
Submitted to Governor Ronald Reagan
Office of the Governor
July 1, 1969
State of California
INTRODUCTION
The following report is presented to provide a greater
understanding of the events and persons involved in the
"People's Park" controversy. It was compiled by the
governor's office from numerous sources, including eye-
witness reports, various official records, newspaper reports
and the minute-by-minute logs and reports of the Berkeley
Police Department, Alameda County Sheriff's Department,
National Guard and other police, units assigned to Berkeley
during the disturbances that occurred during the period of
May 15-25, 1969.
This document is intended to provide a summary of the
background information on the origin of the "People's Park"
controversy SO that the events that culminated in violence
might be fairly weighed by interested citizens. It does
not purport to include all the activities and incidents that
occurred during the period it covers. Nor does it seek to
accuse any individual of any crime or assign or imply
specific blame for specific incidents.
Determining the guilt or innocence of individuals
charged with criminal violations of the law is the re-
sponsibility of the judicial system. Witnesses to specific
illegal acts will have an opportunity to present their
testimony in court and to those legal authorities conduct-
ing formal investigations.
It is virtually impossible for any single newspaper
article or brief television news film to adequately present
the chronological detail included in this summary. This is
chiefly because the news media is required, due to the
swift pace of events, to focus its attention on the very
latest and most violent or newsworthy events.
Hopefully, this report will serve a useful purpose by
conveying a more extensive account of the chronological
sequence of events that escalated into the "People's Park"
violence.
-1-
WHAT PROPERTY IS INVOLVED
The site of the so-called "People's Park" is a 270-by-
450 foot parcel of land bounded by Dwight Way, Haste and
Bowditch Streets. It is located south of Sproul Plaza,
the famous rally site on the University of California campus.
The "People's Park" site is within a block of the 2400
block of Telegraph Avenue, a well-known gathering place
long frequented by student and non-student militants, New
Left orators, hippies, assorted groups of self-proclaimed
revolutionary "street people" and radical activists whose
presence and occasional illegal activities have been a source
of constant concern to residents, merchants, and law en-
forcement officials in the area.
In 1956, the University of California earmarked the
270-by-450 foot lot for acquisition as part of the
university's master plan for expansion. But the actual
acquisition did not occur until June 1967 when the Board
of Regents authorized its purchase for the specific purpose
of constructing intramural and recreational playing fields
for student use. The long-range plans included possible
use of the property, as a site for student housing, faculty
offices or parking.
The apartment houses then located on the site were
demolished at the direction of the University. The first
of these structures was dismantled in November of 1967.
Others were demolished between April and July of 1968. The
last building on the property was a multiple unit structure
which was moved from the site during the first week of
December 1968. The cleared sections of the site remained
vacant until April, 1969 except for broken pieces of
concrete, rocks and litter. No official use was made of
the cleared section. But it was utilized, unofficially and
without permission, by motorists who frequently parked
there--apparently without objection from the university or
other authorities.
CONFRONTATION BEGINS
In March, 1969, university officials in Berkeley learned
that funds would be authorized and available soon to begin
construction of the playing field. 3 The university immed-
iately began preparing schematic drawings and plans. On
April 4, 1969, the university's Capital Outlay Review Board
met at Berkeley and it was confirmed that the playing field
had a high priority for funding and therefore could be
built as planned. 4
-2-
No special public announcement was made at the time
because the plans for the property had been revealed long
before. The planning activity to launch the construction
project involved many persons. Anyone interested in deter-
mining the progress of the university's plans for the
Dwight Way and Bowditch property could easily have learned
that the construction was imminent.
The first indication that the university property
might become the focal point of a confrontation occurred
late in March after the university initiated firm plans
to begin construction of the playing field.
The property was mentioned briefly March 31 in the
Telegraph Avenue Edition of the San Francisco Express Times,
an underground newspaper. According to university in-
vestigators, one sentence in this publication suggested
that the empty lot (the Dwight Way and Bowditch property)
would make a good park--"Why don't we use it?"5
The underground newspaper "Berkeley Barb" also pub-
lished an article (in the issue dated April 18) urging
that the university property be occupied as a park site
the following Sunday, April 20.
The Barb article, headed "Hear Ye, Hear Ye", is re-
produced below:
"A park will be built this Sunday between Dwight and
Haste.
"The land is owned by the University which tore
down a lot of beautiful houses in order to build a swamp.
"The land is now used as free parking space. In a
year the University will build a cement type expensive
parking lot which will fiercely compete with the other
lots for the allegiance of Berkeley's Buicks.
"On Sunday, we will stop this shit. Bring shovels,
hoses, chains, grass, paints, flowers, trees, bull dozers,
top soil, colorful smiles, laughter and lots of sweat.
"At one o'clock our rural reclamation project for
Telegraph Ave. commences in the expectation of beauty.
"We want the park to be a cultural, political, freak
out and rap center for the Western world.*
"All artists should show up and make the park their
magical possession. Many colored towers of imagination
will rise above the Forum and into the future of reality.
Pastel intertwining the trees and reflecting the sun, all
* emphasis added
-3-
Berkeley energy exploding on the disappearing swamp.
The University has no right to create ugliness as a way
of life. We will show up on Sunday and we will clear
one third of the lot and do with it whatever our fantasy
pleases. We could have a child care clinic or a crafts
commune which would communicate its wares by having
medieval-style fairs, a baseball diamond, a rock concert,
or a place to think and sleep in the sun.
"This summer we will not be fucked over by the pigs
'move-on' fascism, we will police our own park and not
allow its occupation by imperial power.
"Come to the Dwight and Haste mud flat at one o'clock
on Sunday, prepared to work and bring your own food picnic.
When we are exhausted we knock off for rock music from
'Joy of Cooking' and whatever bands show up.
"Nobody supervises, and the trip belongs to whoever
dreams.
"Signed,
"Robin Hood's Park Commissioner"
Until the university's plans to make use of the property
became imminent, no one had shown an interest in making a
park of the vacant lot.
A number of well-known Berkeley activists 6 were involved
in the park project. The list included:
ARTHUR LEE GOLDBERG, 27, a former student who was a
member of the "People's Park" negotiating committee and a
key spokesman for the group. Arthur Lee Goldberg has a
long record of arrests involving protest movements dating
back to 1963. He was arrested during the so-called "Free
Speech Movement" at U.C. in 1964 and was sentenced to 120
days in jail.
Goldberg was also a major figure in the "Filthy Speech
Movement" at U.C. a few months later and he was arrested
on charges of disturbing the peace and publicly uttering
obscenities. Records indicate a 30-day jail sentence on
the charges. Goldberg also was involved in various demon-
strations in San Francisco and Oakland.
MICHAEL DELACOUR, 31, a non-student. He was active
early in the park project.
-4-
Delacour was arrested in Los Angeles in 1967 as
a result of a disruption at a high school. He was
arrested in October 1968 on charges of disturbing the
peace, malicious mischief and trespass--all stemming
from the Moses Hall building seizure at the University of
California. He received a 10-day jail sentence.
STEWART EDWARD ALBERT, 29, a non-student. An
associate of Jerry Rubin and other "Yippies," Albert
was listed by the Daily Californian (May 20, 1969) as
attending the initial planning session for "People's Park." "
Albert's police record includes arrests as a result of
disturbances in Sacramento and Berkeley in 1966 (three
separate occasions). He was arrested in Chicago during the
Democratic National Convention disturbances and as a re-
sult of the Moses Hall building seizure at U.C. in October,
1968.
PAUL CARL GLUSMAN, 22, a former student. Glusman also
was listed by the Daily Californian as attending the first
planning session for "People's Park" and was a spokesman
for the activists during the controversy.
He was indicted for his part in the Moses Hall sit-in
(disposition of the case still pending).
WILLIAM CROSBY MILLER, 27 non-student. Miller was a
major spokesman for the "People's Park" movement and
applied for the permit to stage the Memorial Day march. He
also was named by the Daily Californian as a participant
in the first planning session. Miller has been active in
various anti-war and civil rights movements.
Miller was arrested during the "Free Speech Movement"
at U.C. in 1964. He was convicted of trespass and violation
of Penal Code Section 148 (resisting arrest), fined $150
and given one year probation.
Miller was arrested in 1966 as a result of anti-
military disturbances. On one occasion, he was arrested on
charges of failure to disperse and trespass. He received
a $56 fine and 30 days in jail, suspended. He also was
arrested as a result of Telegraph Avenue demonstrations in
Berkeley in 1966.
FRANK JOSEPH BARDACKE, 27, a non-student (identified in
the press as a former graduate student). He was a major
-5-
spokesman for the "People's Park" negotiators.
Bardacke was arrested in Berkeley as a result of
Telegraph Avenue disturbances in 1966 (dismissed) and was
one of the so-called "Oakland 7" defendants acquitted of
a conspiracy charge stemming from anti-draft demonstrations
at the Oakland Induction Center.
On May 19, 1969, Bardacke was arrested by Berkeley
police and booked on a charge of assault with a deadly
weapon and with force likely to produce great bodily
injury. On June 6, 1969, Bardacke was again arrested, this
time by University of California police for malicious mis-
chief (attempting to pull down the fence around "People's
Park.")
MARIO SAVIO, principal leader of the 1964 "Free Speech
Movement" at U.C., appeared at a Sproul Plaza rally staged
to urge support for the "People's Park" project and TOM
HAYDEN, leader of Students for a Democratic Society, turned
up in Berkeley during the "People's Park" controversy.
One of the better known figures involved in the
"People's Park" controversy was Arthur Lee Goldberg. The
San Francisco Examiner (May 25, 1969) quoted the former FSM
leader as saying that the "People's Park" project was
launched by "five or 10 old-time politicos" and marked "the
beginning of resistance." "
The Guardian, a New York publication that described
itself as an independent "radical" weekly, published an
article signed by an "Art Goldberg"* in its May 17, 1969,
issue. The article elaborated on events leading up to the
"People's Park" project, a development referred to as the
"great Berkeley land grab."
It was not, Goldberg's article said, "merely a spon-
taneous, joyous outpouring by revolutionaries, idealists,
flower children and do-gooders. For most participants, it
was a calculated political act, ** designed to put the
expansionist and repressive university up against the wall. "**
This article boasted that the park project had "caught
on beyond the most optimistic expectations
Liberal
Telegraph Avenue merchants contribute money for sod, tools
* (At least two persons known as "Art Goldberg" have written
for radical publications or have been involved in street
demonstrations. The Guardian did not specify which "Art
Goldberg" wrote the article in its May 17, 1969 issue.)
** Emphasis added.
-6-
and food because they hope it will keep 'trouble' from
breaking out on the avenue as it did last summer*
Radicals and revolutionaries see the park as a staging
area for further political action. "**
"The university is in a very difficult position," the
Guardian article said. "If it moves its bulldozers on a
nearly completed park, it will arouse the wrath not only
of the young people and the radicals, but it will
disappoint the liberals and expose its true expansionist
nature. If it allows the park to exist, it knows it
has on its doorstep a center for the type of activity it
despises."
The Daily California, the U.C. student newspaper,
credited the "People's Park" idea to a meeting it said was
held by Mike Delacour. Others at this planning session,
the Daily Californian said, were "Stu Albert, Bill Miller,
Joel Tornabene, Wendy Schlesinger, and Paul Glusman.
SUNDAY, APRIL 20, 1969.
The Berkeley Barb announcement and the leaflets drew
a crowd of people to the "People's Park" project on
Sunday, April 20. Street people were joined by some
students and other citizens. Many of the volunteers who
worked on the project on this day and subsequently viewed
it simply as a local beautification project. They thought
they were merely helping make constructive use of an empty
lot.
The park sympathizers apparently were unaware that the
development of the "People's Park" without the University's
permission, amounted to an unlawful seizure of property.
The seizure became more of an urgent problem as the project
grew because, as the owner, the university might be liable
if the development resulted in injuries to anyone or if it
became a public nuisance.
This problem of liability is one that has not been
sufficiently stressed. The loose coalition of street people,
activists, radicals and the innocent citizens who became
pawns in this controversy were not legally responsible for
the property's usage. Many of the street people disclaim the
idea of legal responsibility for public or private land. Our
legal system does not permit such irresponsibility. Because
the university held title to the land and thus could become
liable for any illegal misuse of it, university officials
** Emphasis added.
-7-
8
moved to re-assert control of the property.
APRIL 30, 1969
On April 30, 1969, the university issued a statement
saying that it was proceeding with its plans to use the
land to meet student recreational needs, a goal authorized
by the Board of Regents almost two years before. The
statement declared that the University was perfectly will-
ing to discuss the design of the field and possible uses
of the area by the adjacent community as well as the
possibility of alternative sites on which the University,
the City of Berkeley, and the community might join to
create a park-like facility. 9 In fact, the University
architect prepared several schematic plans allowing for a
children's play area on the property and providing an
additional area for lawn, benches and trees.
Despite several meetings involving Chancellor Roger
B. Heyns, other college officials and various groups
purportedly interested in the "People's Park" project,
nothing was resolved.
On May 8, Chancellor Heyns invited his Advisory
Committee on Student Housing and the Environment to assist
in drafting the university's plan to develop the area. 10
"I indicated that although the need for playing fields
was important, Chancellor Heyns said "the plan might
well be modified to accommodate the interests of other
university recreational needs and purposes.
The limits he set for the final design were these:
1.
The functions of the field must be related
to University needs, particularly student
needs for recreational space.
2.
The area must remain under the control of the
University with respect to planning and
eventual use.
3.
The field must not present police or other control
problems. *
4.
It must not be used for the gathering of large
crowds for meeting purposes. II
But Chancellor Heyns later reported this effort at
conciliation proved futile.
"
The individuals working
on the "People's Park" project refused to stop further
development and refused to organize a responsible committee
with which the University could consult." 12
* Emphasis added.
-8-
ILLEGAL PARK DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES.
Meanwhile, development at the Bowditch and Dwight Way
site continued. In addition to planting trees, shrubs and
erecting playground equipment, volunteers and street
people working on the project also dug a bonfire pit and
another hole they said was for a pond. A bulletin board
was constructed, and filled with political pamphlets on
various subjects. One of the anonymous leaflets later
posted on this bulletin board was a naked threat of
violence.
The leaflet was signed "By Madmen" and warned that the
"People's Park" project was the start of a showdown between
the "Industrial-University Machine and our Revolutionary
Culture."
"We need the park to live and grow," the leaflet said,
and eventually we need all of Berkeley.*
"
If the University attempts to reclaim $1.3 million
worth of land now claimed by the people, we will destroy
$5 million worth of University property.
Like many of the
other leaflets circulated in Berkeley, particularly those
urging illegal acts, this leaflet did not include the names
of its authors.
By this time, police were receiving regular complaints
that demonstrators and street people supporting the park were
holding nightly rallies, mass singing with bongo drums, and
creating bonfires at the site. Some of the street people
pitched blankets and slept there, creating an obvious threat
to health due to the complete absence of sanitary facilities.
The street people and their more militant sympathizers
were seeking to create an aura of legal immunity for
"People's Park." This effort to establish the site as somehow
beyond the reach of laws that govern the rest of the
community was similar to previous attempts to gain support
for the concept that a university campus should be a
sanctuary where society's civil and criminal laws do not
apply. Instead, the street people and militants declared 14
that they would assume police authority over the site.
City officials also were concerned that "People's Park"
might be utilized as a staging area for future disturbances
and confrontations. 15 Their reason for concern was well-
founded.
In the past 11 months, preceding "People's Park" crisis,
three other major riots erupted in Berkeley. All included
* Emphasis added.
-9-
so-called "street people" and other militants from the
South Campus area. This section adjacent to the University
has become the most serious crime control problem in
Berkeley.
During the same period sporadic violence has occurred
in Berkeley. Most of this was the work of persons unknown.
Some of it was directly associated with "protest" movements
that turned violent. Here is a sampling of the violent
acts and crime problems that have confronted Berkeley
authorities during the past year:
There have been eight major bombings or attempted
bombings.
Nearly 11-hundred drug arrests, including almost 750
in the South Campus Area.
16
Berkeley and other law enforcement officials have
confiscated:
More than 1,000 sticks of dynamite;
More than 200 pistols, rifles, shotguns and other
weapons;
Dozens of Molotov cocktails and materials for mak-
ing these deadly incendiary devices, including
bottles, gasoline and primer cord, a sort of fuse
used to set off high-powered explosives.
These explosives and weapons have been found in caches
stored in the Berkeley hills, in apartments, in cars,
garages and have been confiscated from persons arrested in
or near Berkeley.
There have been dozens of arson attempts in Berkeley.
Suspected arson-set fires have caused at least $800,000
damage in the past seven months alone (this includes the
Wheeler Auditorium fire).
The eight major bombings or attempts included:
1.
Two California Highway Patrolmen firebombed while
standing at the intersection of Bancroft and
Telegraph during the June 28-July 3 riots of
1968. These officers were engulfed in flames and
suffered serious burns requiring lengthy hospital-
ization. One recently returned to limited duty
only to re-enter the 17 hospital for further surgery
on June 11, 1969.
2.
The bombings of a newly-constructed building at
Dwight and Telegraph. This blew a 12 by 16 foot
hole in the rear of the structure and broke a
water main.
-10-
3.
The bombing of a guard house at the west end
of the University of California campus.
4.
The bombing of Callahan Hall, the ROTC building
on campus.
5.
A blast that ripped a tie out of the Southern
Pacific Railroad tracks in Berkeley.
6.
The attempted bombing of a Berkeley police car
as it was parked in the police parking lot.
Officers said the homemade bomb utilized a
plastic-based explosive powerful enough to blow
up the car, the driver and several adjacent
buildings if it had gone off. It was hooked to
the ignition of the vehicle, but did not explode.
7.
An explosion at a utility company (P. G. & E.) tower
in the Berkeley Hills above Grizzly Peak. There
were several other such attempts and explosions
at utility facilities in the Bay Area during this
period.
8.
Bungled bombing attempts at two industrial plants.
One involved an effort to dynamite a huge vat of
a highly flammable substance in a chemical plant
and the other was an attempt to blow up another
tank of cottonseed oil at a food processing plant.
Fortunately, neither of the tanks erupted. 18
Berkeley City officials were forced to declare a state of
civil disaster during those summer riots June 30-July 3 and
again August 30-September 9, 1968. In both instances 19 out-
side police had to be summoned to help restore order.
At the request of local officials, the Governor declared
a state of extreme emergency last February 5 (1969) during
the violence connected with the Third World Liberation Front
strike at the University of California.
The People's Park controversy (May 15-June 2) is the
fourth major riot to have erupted in Berkeley in less than a
year.
In addition to the firebomb attempt to kill the two
highway patrolmen, one Berkeley policeman was shot during
last summer's riots and dozens more were fired at by unknown
assailants.
City officials had been threatened. 20
-11-
That is the background of violence that preceded the
"People's Park" confrontation. It was merely the latest of
a whole series of street problems that have confronted
Berkeley officials. Many of the same faces seen in the
street crowds during the "People's Park" controversy were
active in the previous demonstrations.
Berkeley officials emphasize that the violent militants
were a small minority. Many of the demonstrators involved
in all these disturbances are non-violent types and while
they are militantly vocal, they would stop short of violence
in registering their protest. But as City Manager William
Hanley has pointed out Berkeley authorities had to be
prepared for anything. 21 In all the previous disturbances
and riots, dangerous militants were involved and proved that
they were willing and capable of committing all types of
violent crimes - from arson and vandalism to setting off
powerful plastic explosives.
The summer riots of 1968 cost at least $250,000 in pro-
perty damage in the City of Berkeley. 22 That is only a part
of the total costs involved. It does not include the related
costs of increased police protection, court and prosecution
expenses and the financial losses by Berkeley merchants.
In each of the demonstrations associated with disturb-
ances, the hard-core militants eagerly sought and often
received support from non-violent students, faculty members
and other citizens. But violence did erupt. Somebody
fired bullets at Berkeley police officers. Someone set off
powerful explosives. Someone who was willing to commit
arson and attempt murder threw firebombs at two California
Highway Patrolmen, shot a Berkeley police officer and
committed dozens of arson attempts.
That is the background Berkeley authorities had to
consider in preparing to cope with the "People's Park"
controversy. Indeed, the park site itself became more and
more of a police problem as the days went by in early May.
Citizens in the area gathered petitions signed by 48
persons (later expanded to 132) objecting to the use of the
property for the "People's Park."
During the period April 28-May 14, Berkeley police
received a total of 48 formal complaints regarding "People's
Park. " 23 One involved a 21-year-old male picked up for
indecent exposure after police found him sitting in the park,
completely nude--in full view of park occupants and bypassers.
The other types of police complaints were:
4 arrests for drugs and/or narcotics violations
-12-
1 armed robbery (at the corner of Haste and Bowditch)
1 theft
1 charge of resisting arrest and battery
1 battery complaint
2 complaints of drunken juveniles (including one 14-year
old)
5 cases of juvenile loitering
5 complaints of juveniles sleeping in the park
4 cases of juvenile loitering that involved runaways
(one from Wisconsin)
23 complaints from neighbors about the noise. These
ranged from complaints about bongo drumming in the early
hours to shouted obscenities.
A great number of plants identified by police as mari-
juana were later discovered planted in the park.
24
NEGOTIATIONS
Chancellor Heyns said the chairman of the Committee on
Student Housing and Environment reported on May 12 that he
was unable to find a responsible group (among the street
people) who would agree to help devise an acceptable plan
for developing the area. "The anonymous developers could
not form a responsible group with whom we could deal,"
Chancellor Heyns said. "The representatives of the 'people
refused to accept the basic premise: that the design and
use of the area was finally the responsibility of the uni-
versity, no matter how flexible the design or how liberal
the use. = 25
Furthermore, Chancellor Heyns said, " the attitude
of people working in the park was becoming increasingly
belligerent, and the development was proceeding on a scale
which heightened the danger that if the university did not
assert its ownership soon, a massive confrontation might
result
There were various structures, tools, and
activities on the site which presented a serious hazard of
injury to children or others and for which the university
might be liable. " 26
On May 13, Chancellor Heyns declared: "It is now clear
that no one can speak for the anonymous developers (of the
park) and no one can control the growing safety, health and
-13-
liability problems in the area. = 27
As a result, he announced that the university would
erect a fence around the property to exclude unauthorized
persons so that the site might be surveyed, soil tested
and otherwise prepared for development as the university
planned.
Once again, the chancellor explained that part of the
university project could be developed as an outdoor
recreational area that would include greenery and play
equipment. 28
Apparently this did not satisfy the street people or
their sympathizers.
At this point, it should be noted that Berkeley City
Manager William Hanley has pointed out that the City of
Berkeley was then in the process of acquiring land for a
2.8 acre park adjacent to Willard School, only two blocks
south of the university land. This acquisition was
recently completed at a cost of more than $750,000 and pre-
liminary plans called for beginning the Berkeley city pro-
ject later this summer. (Another $200,000 will be spent
in development. )
29
The various attempts to resolve the dispute failed.
The street people rejected the argument that this public
property should be developed as the Board of Regents had
specified. 30 In making this decision, the Board of Regents
was acting as the duly constituted representative of all 31 the
people of California, the owner of the disputed land.
In Mr. Hanley's words, "The basic issue was and is
whether public property is to be developed by duly con-
stituted authority or by any ad hoc group that chooses to
assert right and powers over it. * Or, as it was succinctly
put in a 'People"s' handout (a leaflet) on May 16," he
continued, "'Control over the Park represented more than just
a piece of land. * It raised the basic question of who will
control the institutions 32 and property in this country and
for what purpose?"
The park issue provided a convenient way to present
this challenge to lawful authority. The San Francisco
Examiner, in an editorial May 22, cautioned its readers to
keep in mind the exact origin of the events and motives that
led to the "People's Park" confrontation. Said the Examiner:
* Emphasis added.
-14-
"The Berkeley radical clique chose the
'People's Park' as an issue around which it might
rally sympathetic public opinion. After all,
isn't it un-American to be against a park? But
the park itself was not the crux, it was an excuse
for confrontation, confrontation being Chapter I
in the revolutionary handbook
"Radical leaders summoned the university
hangers-on and compatible students to defend the
'park,' bringing sticks, stones, steel bars and
whatever weapons came to mind and hand. Handbills
exhorted, 'Kill! Kill!' Thus, the theme of
violence was sounded before a single policeman
or National Guardsman appeared on the scene.
"The possibility of someone dying as a result
was shuffled into the deck. A young man named
James Rector drew the fatal card. He was the
victim of the radical leaders' cunning zeal and
they compensate him for his life by accounting
him a martyr
As the Examiner noted, no matter how many innocent
and well-motivated citizens might be involved in supporting
the "People's Park" development, to others the basic moti-
vation was defiance of the law of our society for political
purposes. The participation of citizens who were motivated
by a simple desire to improve the environment was eagerly
sought and exploited by those who used "People's Park" as
an issue for confrontation.
May 14, 1969
On May 14, University representatives posted "No
Trespassing" signs on stakes around the "People's Park"
site. The San Francisco Chronicle said 51 sign-bearing
stakes were in place by 8:45 a.m. But the demonstrators
ripped them down and burned the signs in the firepit. 33
Later that day, a crowd gathered at the park site.
The assembly grew to about 350 persons during the late
evening hours, but then thinned out. Some 75 persons
brought their sleeping gear and blankets to physically
occupy the site, apparently to prevent the university-
hired construction crew from erecting the fence. 34
Because there had been threats in advance to resist
the fencing with violence, university officials made arrange-
ments for law enforcement assistance to protect the con-
struction crew. About 275 officers were assembled from
the Berkeley Police Department, Alameda County Sheriff's
Office and the California Highway Patrol. 35
*Emphasis added.
-15-
May 15, 1969
At 4:45 a.m. on Thursday, May 15, a small contingent
of law enforcement officers equipped with portable loud
speakers went to the site. Other police units remained
in reserve.
There, the police informed the crowd that it was
trespassing. Individuals were advised that they had a
choice of leaving or facing arrest. Most decided to leave.
They took their blankets and other gear with them. Only
about a dozen stayed. The police issued another warning.
This time, all but three young men left. These three per-
sons were arrested on trespassing charges.
36
A construction crew then moved onto the park site
and began building the fence at 6:20 a.m. Police kept
the scene under observation the rest of the morning.
Although about 100 persons gathered at the site, in crowds
that grew and waned again, officers reported no further
attempts at physically interfering with the work on the
fence.
Speakers addressing the crowd at the park site were
urging attendance at a mass protest rally at noon on the
Sproul Hall Plaza. There were no indications at this
point that the noon rally would become violent. Rallies
are a routine occurrence at Sproul Plaza and most do not
involve major violence, although the rhetoric of speakers
often is inflammatory.
The reduced police contingent that remained on duty
had instructions to defend the fence and the construction
crew against any mob attempt to tear down the fence or
harm the workers involved. 37
NOON RALLY
(May 15, 1969)
* 12:00 p.m.
By noon, a crowd estimated at 2,000 persons or more was
gathered at Sproul Hall Plaza on the University of California
campus. It included street people, student sympathizers,
faculty and university employees, newsmen and others. It
was impossible to determine how many in the crowd could be
classified as active protestors. But the number was
sizeable. None of the leaflets announcing the noon rally
*
Times listed are approximate times of events and
reports of events in adjacent paragraphs, as listed on
police, National Guard logs.
-16-
suggested violence or other overt action. But after the
crowd was assembled, it became obvious that at least some
of those present anticipated more than rhetoric. A group
of "medics" dressed in white uniforms and wearing Red Cross
symbols mingled in the crowd. 38 Campus police report that
on prior occasions involving violence or rioting, similar
teams of "medics" had appeared in advance. While the rally
was under way, police received reports that unidentified
persons had been sighted on the roof of a building west of
"People's Park. 11 39
There were nine speakers at the rally. The list included
Paul Jacobs, a non-student who was the Peace and Freedom
Party candidate for U. S. Senator last year, and Michael
Lerner who reserved the Sproul steps for the noon rally on
behalf of the "New Left Forum, "allegedly for a talk on
the Middle East crisis. 40 However, the Middle East was
never discussed. The San Francisco Chronicle said during
his speech, Lerner declared: "If the idea of people decid-
ing what to do with their own lives catches on, it will
bring down capitalism and the establishment can't stand
that.' 41
The final speaker was Daniel Siegel, U. C. Student Body
President-Elect. According to campus police who were
present and taped the entire event, the crowd became
visibly excited during Siegel's speech. Scores of people
began screaming, yelling and raising clenched fists above
their heads. 42
Siegel (who has been accused of inciting to riot) was
quoted as saying,
If we are to win this thing, it is
because we are making it more costly for the university to
put up its fence than it is for them to take down their
fence. What we have to do then, is maximize the cost to
them, minimize the cost to us. So what that means, is:
people be careful. Don't let those pigs beat the shit
out of you, don't let yourselves get arrested on felonies. .
43
The Los Angeles Times reported that the rally ended when
Siegel climaxed his speech by shouting: "Let's go down
and take over the park." 44
After a brief pause, witnesses said the crowd began to
take up the chant, "Take the Park! We want the Park!" 45
12:38 p.m.
The shouting, cheering throng began moving away from the
plaza toward Telegraph Avenue, advancing on a line of
approximately 75 law enforcement officers gathered about
three blocks south of the campus and a half block from
the park site. At Haste and Telegraph, a line of Berkeley
-17-
police and California Highway Patrolmen stood blocking the
Haste street entrance to "People's Park" where workmen
were still constructing the fence.
After the leading elements of the crowd left Sproul Plaza
someone broke in the glass door of the Bank of America
on Telegraph Avenue. Some marchers smashed the window of
an automobile parked along the street. Others began
hurling rocks, bottles and other missiles. 46
The outburst of violence occurred so quickly that officers
initially had difficulty mobilizing their efforts to
control what now had become a mob. As the bulk of the crowd
reached Haste Street, it divided into two groups. Half
went down an alley which leads directly to the "People's
Park." They were followed by sheriff's deputies.
The remaining marchers moved west on Haste Street about
a quarter of a block and then turned around to face the
line of California Highway Patrol officers. In the inter-
vening time, protestors on rooftops lining Haste and
Telegraph Avenue began hurling missiles down on the officers
below and toward police vehicles. Rocks, sticks, bricks
and jagged pieces of pipe and steel--some 18 inches long--
began raining down into the police ranks. Cherry bombs
(some with BB shot glued on to act as shrapnel) began
exploding in the streets. Some officers were being felled
by the rocks and missiles thrown 48 from the rooftops, and
from within the surging crowd.
12:45 p.m.
Those on the rooftops had stockpiled a good supply of rocks
and other missiles. They kept up a steady barrage.
Stockpiles of rocks, steel rods and bottles were also
observed in nearby alleys.
The battle grew more intense as the officers struggled to
contain and disperse the more violent protestors from the
ranks of others who were caught in this unexpected melee.
49
Small groups of officers were surrounded by a milling mass
of people shouting obscenities and pushing forward. In such
a scene of chaos, it was often impossible for individual
officers to determine which members of the crowd were
assaulting them, and which were merely trying to avoid
being caught in the battle area.
At Haste and Telegraph, someone in the crowd opened a fire
hydrant, flooding the street with a powerful stream of water.
-18-
A sergeant from the sheriff's office later turned it
off. 50
12:52 p.m.
In an attempt to stop the mob from advancing further and
as a matter of self-protection, sheriff's deputies began
hurling tear gas cannisters to disperse the swarming
crowd. But the barrage from the rooftops and streets
continued. By this time, several groups of Highway Patrol
officers were surrounded by screaming protestors hurling
insults and missiles at them.
A knife, apparently thrown from the crowd or a rooftop,
struck CHP officer Albert C. Bradley of Union City. It hit
his chest and penetrated to the bone, causing a puncture
wound that required hospital treatment. 51
Other officers, not protected by flak vests, were being hit
with bottles, rocks and pieces of concrete. Some were
struck in the face. Others suffered injuries that included
internal bleeding. The wild battling continued for some
time. Law enforcement officers kept trying to disperse and
isolate groups of demonstrators. The more violent of the
militants were driven back a number of times, only to re-
group again and send another wave charging into police ranks.
Others in the crowd, including many who were attempting to
be non-violent, were fleeing from the streets.
1:18 p.m.
Traffic became clogged in the area and Berkeley police called
for assistance to help clear the jam.
52
The scene was one of violent confusion. Tear gas cannisters
had left clouds of gas in the streets. Protestors had cap-
tured strategic spots behind automobiles and at intersections
while others were pelting small groups of policemen with
rocks, bottles and throwable pieces of reinforcing steel.
1:20 p.m.
The outmanned police forces requested additional tear gas
to control the crowd, which by then was hurling barricades
at cars as it surged down Telegraph Avenue. 53
Here is an example from the many incidents which occurred
at the height of the riot.
At Parker and Telegraph, a City of Berkeley vehicle was
overturned (and later set afire). The two Berkeley reserve
-19-
officers sent to control traffic at the intersection were
forced to retreat under a barrage of rocks, bottles and
bricks thrown from the ranks of the 250-300 militants
leading the charge.
First, the officers ran into the entrance of a furniture
store where one radioed for aid. 54 The windows of the
store were soon smashed by a hail of rocks. The two
officers then headed toward the parking lot of Cunha Pontiac
Co. at 2556 Telegraph Avenue.
Officer A, 55 the older of the two reserve policemen and a
20-year veteran of this voluntary police auxiliary force,
was closest to the parking lot and yelled to his companion
to seek cover quickly. While they were making their way
toward the lot, Officer B suddenly turned and made several
charging maneuvers at the crowd in an effort to slow down
their advance. These movements apparently surprised some
of the demonstrators because their ranks broke momentarily.
But they regrouped quickly and began rushing the officers
again. During the last of these maneuvers, Officer B said
he suffered a leg cramp which left him unable to maintain a
fast pace. He also had suffered a large bruise on the back
from a rock or brick and was hit several times by other
objects which struck his flak vest or helmet.
Both men finally took cover behind a car in the parking lot
of the Cunha Pontiac body shop. The demonstrators kept up
with the attack, throwing rocks and bottles at them. In a
written statement later reporting his injury, Officer A
said: "We both felt that our lives were in danger and that
we would have to move to a safer position to stay alive."
Noticing that the door of the Cunha body shop was now open,
Officer A yelled to his companion to make for it. As he
started toward the door (or some time just prior to this)
Officer A had been hit on the left hand by a large brick.
He was shaking this pain-numbed limb trying to restore some
feeling to it as he ran from behind the parked car toward
the door. En route, he stumbled and went down to one knee
momentarily as rocks and pieces of concrete continued to fly
from the ranks of the demonstrators.
As this was happening, his partner, Officer B, was still
pinned behind two cars being attacked by the militants.
Suddenly, one of the demonstrators (apparently spotting
Officer A running for safety) dashed forward, shouting:
"Pig! Pig! Kill the Pig!" The crowd followed this
demonstrator in a rush toward the two officers. Officer B,
who said he was lying flattened against the top of the car
shielding him, drew his .38 caliber revolver at this point
-20-
and leveled it at a charging demonstrator who fled at the
sight of the weapon. The officer did not fire the weapon.
Henry A. Hoglund, an employee of the body shop and an eye-
witness, described the scene later in a letter to the
Catholic Voice. Hoglund said rocks and bricks were being
thrown at Officer B as he was pinned between two cars. "Both
windshields were broken out and holes (were) put in doors
and quarter panels on the side of one car, = he said. "One
windshield was broken by a 15-20 pound chunk of concrete
that was aimed at his head. Only then did he pull his
revolver
"56
The flurry of action caused the crowd to retreat momentarily
while the two reserve officers ducked inside the body shop.
The doors were quickly shut behind them.
After the officers were inside, someone noticed that the
overturned vehicle was now burning. Berkeley Police Captain
Tom Johnson, who witnessed the scene from a helicopter, said
the vehicle was set afire by four or five demonstrators who
hurled what appeared to be road flares under the overturned
vehicle until the gasoline tank apparently ignited. 57
The crowd of demonstrators remained outside the body shop
throwing stones and shouting until finally dispersed by
tear gas. (A fire truck sent to extinguish the flaming city
vehicle and police cars trying to reach the scene were
pelted by rocks thrown by running groups of demonstrators).
1:39 p.m.
About 20 to 25 people were observed on the roof of a
building at Blake and Telegraph. They were hurling tear gas
cannisters and other objects down into the streets. Small
groups of CHP officers and other police were still surrounded
by surging crowds of people. At about this point, the
administrative commander of the Alameda County Sheriff's
Office decided that the riot was out of control and that there
was a grave possibility that some law enforcement officers
could be killed. Sheriff's deputies returned to their command
center at the University of California Police headquarters
and were issued shotguns.
When deputies returned to the scene, many CHP Officers still
were under assault by hundreds of persons. The CHP Officers
were armed with pistols, but they did not use these weapons -
even during times when they faced the prospect of being
stoned to death in the street.
As the Sheriff's deputies moved in they were showered with
-21-
missiles from the rooftops. Some deputies responded with
shotgun blasts in an effort to clear the rooftops of
those who were hurling missiles down into the streets.
Shotgun blasts also were fired at street level. Some of
the wounded said they were not demonstrating.
2:05 p.m.
During part of these chaotic episodes of violence in the
streets, police also had gas dispensing vehicles spread-
ing tear gas to disperse the crowd. One of these vehicles
was trapped at one point by the crowd and was sprayed with
missiles from the roof and the crowds.
Shortly after 2 p.m., a U.S. mail truck was stopped and
surrounded by militants. Berkeley police reported that the
doors to the vehicle were opened and militants appeared to
be rummaging about inside it. Police logs noted reports
of mail being taken from the vehicle, but postal authori-
ties said later it could not be determined whether any mail
was missing. The tires of the vehicle were deflated and
soil was put into the gas tank. 58
Ambulances moving in and out of the area retrieving injured
added to the general confusion. Law enforcement officers
made a number of arrests and police vehicles moved in and
out removing those arrested.
2:47 p.m.
Police reported spotting someone armed with a rifle on the
roof of a building at Dana Street and Dwight Way. 59
Sporadic battling continued for two hours more. Militants
overturned more vehicles and turned in false fire alarms. 60
Another fire hydrant was opened and caused brief flooding
in the street.
4:20 p.m.
By 4:20 p.m. the construction crew building the fence at
"People's Park" completed the job and asked for a police
escort out of the area.
4:38 p.m.
The mail truck disabled earlier had to be towed away.
-22-
5:35 p.m.
The level of battle subsided as the afternoon passed.
But rumors and false reports kept police busily moving
through the area in an effort to restore complete order.
A group of people were spotted on a rooftop at Ellsworth
and Durant about 5:35 p.m. One person was aiming an object
as if it were a weapon. A closer inspection by helicopter
disclosed that it was probably a stick. 62 It was this
type of false alarm that kept the atmosphere tense and
officers constantly alert for more serious violence.
6 p.m.
The worst of the outbursts of violence appeared to be over
by 6 p.m. Officers were securing intersections and other
officials made plans to request emergency regulations.
Shortly before 2 p.m. -- during the height of the violence -
Sheriff Madigan had requested that Governor Ronald Reagan
alert the National Guard for possible deployment. At the
same time, he also requested other law enforcement agencies
to help.
REQUEST FOR NATIONAL GUARD ASSISTANCE
At the start of the noon rally, a total of 159 officers
were on duty (37 Berkeley PD, 26 Sheriff's deputies and 100
CHP officers). When the crowd from the Sproul Plaza rally
turned violent, this proved totally insufficient to control
the situation, and other squads of police were recalled to
duty. The Mutual Aid Officers (reinforcements from surround-
ing law enforcement agencies) began arriving at 2:15 p.m.
By the end of the day, the total number of officers employed
in quelling the riot reached 791, including 95 Berkeley
police officers and 696 Mutual Aid (California Highway
Patrol, Alameda County Sheriff's, other police departments).
William Hanley, Berkeley City Manager, Bruce Baker,
Berkeley Chief of Police and Mayor Wallace Johnson concurred
with Sheriff Madigan's request for State National Guard forces
to prevent further violence and disorder. At their request,
Governor Reagan at about 9:00 p.m. signed the proclamation
calling the Guard to active duty. Also at the request of 64 local
officials, the Governor set forth emergency regulations.
Three battalions of the 49th Infantry Brigade with supporting
units were ordered to Berkeley and prepared to assume
missions 65 under the tactical direction of the sheriff on May
16.
-23-
A command post was established that evening in the
Berkeley Hall of Justice. The emergency regulations
included a prohibition against loitering on the streets
or campus between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. and against
outdoor public assemblies.
These regulations were announced Thursday evening by
a helicopter flying over the riot area. The National
Guardsmen assembled during the night and took up stations
in Berkeley.
At the end of the day May 15, a total of 48 persons
had been arrested, including six juveniles. The charges
against them ranged from assaulting an officer to assault
with a dangerous weapon, failure 66 to disperse and refusing
to leave University property.
67
The casualty list showed these figures:
Berkeley Police Department
39
(7 required hospital
treatment)
California Highway Patrol
59
(9 required hospital
or medical treatment)
Other officers
5
(3 required hospital
treatment)
Totals
103
Berkeley City Manager William Hanley said the total number
of non-law enforçement casualties was 43; most resulted from
shotgun pellets.
68
Officers who did not require hospital treatment suffered
lesser injuries (bruises, minor cuts and blows to the
stomach and head, etc., which did not require immediate
medical care, but could prove more serious later).
The property damage from the rioters and other vandalism
included 22 smashed plate glass windows, or a total of
1,576 square feet. These stores were located chiefly on
Telegraph, Bancroft and Haste. 69 In addition, scores of police
vehicles suffered damage, including broken windows and dents.
-24-
THE DEATH OF JAMES BENNETT RECTOR
James Bennett Rector, 25, of San Jose, was fatally
wounded by a shotgun blast during the riot in Berkeley on
Thursday afternoon, May 15, 1969. Rector died the
following Monday night, May 19, at 10:12 p.m. in Herrick
Memorial Hospital.
The autopsy report listed the cause of death as "shock
and hemorrhage due to multiple shotgun wounds with per-
foration of the aorta. "70
It has been reported unofficially (in newspaper accounts)
that Rector was visiting Berkeley at the time of the riot
and was with a group of people atop a roof near the inter-
section of Dwight Way and Telegraph Avenue.
71
He was shot
some time after 2:00 p.m.
At this writing, the precise circumstances regarding
Rector's death have yet to be established officially by a
coroner's inquest. Further details on his death and on his
activities during the riot must await these legal proceedings.
However, because some news media outlets have erroneously
identified James Bennett Rector as a "student" at the
University of California, the following factual information
is offered:
So far as can be learned, James Bennett Rector was not a
student at the University of California in Berkeley and never
had been enrolled at that institution.
At the time of his death, he was on probation following a
conviction on charges of burglary and possession of mari-
juana. (See below).
The day after Rector was wounded, police found his auto-
mobile parked in the downtown area of Berkeley near the riot
area. Inside the vehicle, police found a Remington .22
caliber, semi-automatic rifle in a disassembled state; and a
telephone induction coil, a piece of electronic equipment
72
used for tape-recording telephone calls or for wire-tapping.
Police reported that one round of .22 caliber ammunition
also was discovered in Rector's pocket at the time he was
hospitalized.
James Bennett Rector, 73 born March 8, 1944; height 6 feet;
weight 165; listed as a graduate of Santa Clara High School;
enlisted in the United States Air Force 1/31/63 (AF Serial
-25-
No. 197-602-98). He received a general discharge 12/30/63.
Police files list the following record of arrests,
convictions and other entries on James Bennett Rector:
8/27/66
Arrested by San Jose police, traffic violations.
11/28/66
Arrested by San Jose police on charges of burg-
lary and receiving stolen property.
4/5/67
Convicted of receiving stolen property;
sentenced to 90 days in jail; two years proba-
tion.
10/27/67
Arrested by San Jose police on charges of
receiving stolen property; burglary; grand theft,
auto; possession of marijuana.
12/29/67
Convicted of possession of marijuana and burg-
lary; received a sentence of two months in the
county jail; two years probation. Probation
period to expire 12/29/69.
7/22/68
Registered with San Jose police department as a
narcotics violator, as required by California's
Health and Safety Code.
MAY 16 - MAY 25, 1969
The National Guard took up stations in Berkeley Friday,
May 16. Their initial missions were to maintain a security
perimeter at the "People's Park" fence; to deny unauthorized
vehicular traffic into the area surrounding "People's Park"
and to guard the Berkeley City Hall with roving foot patrols.
In addition, 10 two-man roof top observation posts were
established on Telegraph Avenue between Bancroft and Blake.
74
The activity by the militants developed into a pattern
between May 16 and May 19. Dissidents and their supporters
would group in defiance of the emergency regulation and
speakers would harangue the assembled crowd on the "People's
Park" controversy. Insults and obscenities were directed at
both the National Guardsmen and the police.
There were a number of skirmishes; false bomb reports;
maneuvers by the National Guard and police units to disperse
marching gangs of militants. California Highway Patrol units
used gas cannisters to break up one crowd at Telegraph and
Bancroft Streets May 17 after militants pelted the CHP officers
with a barrage of rocks and bottles. The frequent false bomb
reports and rumors of armed gangs within the city kept the
atmosphere tense. 75
-26-
National Guard units also were forced to use tear gas
at Sproul Plaza to disperse a hostile crowd on May 19. 76
Total arrests for the four-day period:
77
May 16
21 arrests
May 17
26 arrests
May 18
19 arrests
May 19
42 arrests
On May 20, a crowd of 4,000 - 5,000 persons marched
through the campus shortly after noon but were prevented
from entering Berkeley's business district by police and
National Guardsmen. Berkeley police warned the group that
the mass gathering was prohibited and directed the crowd to
disperse. With National Guardsmen moving in, the demon-
.
strators divided into several groups. One section of about
1,000 persons marched toward Chancellor Heyns' home on the
north side of the campus. Some dissidents began throwing
rocks and bottles and National Guardsmen used tear gas to
disperse the chanting crowd. 78
Two police officers were injured at the Chancellor's
home. One campus officer was struck in the back by a rock,
smashed in the mouth by a militant and suffered a hand injury. 79
Several crowds of people moved about in a mass on campus,
and there was more rock throwing. The largest concentration
was near the Campanile where a rally was being held.
Police reported that the balcony of the Associated
Students building was loaded with rocks and chunks of cement. 80
One crowd of about 1,000 persons was reported at the west
end of the campus; another group of several hundred massed at
University and Oxford Streets and began moving east. Similar
large gatherings were reported at the Campanile and Sproul
Plaza. Berkeley and other police units donned gas masks in
case tear gas had to be used to control the crowd. National
Guardsmen began moving around the Sproul Plaza area. Police
logs reported that the crowd was left an access to retreat out
of the northeast corner of the Plaza and the west side of the
Plaza. 81 A gas-dispensing helicopter was sent aloft.
As the Guardsmen were moving in, another barrage of rock
throwing took place in Sproul Plaza. At 1:58 p.m. a University
policeman, speaking from a balcony on the second floor of the
Student Union, announced to the crowd that chemical agents
would soon be dropped. He urged the remaining crowd in Sproul
Plaza to disperse. 82
Some people did so. But others stayed.
-27-
The National Guard said the tear gas was dropped
by helicopter at 2:06 p.m. into Sproul Hall Plaza at a
time when "a group of 600-700 dissidents were closing on
the troops and three chairs were thrown from an upper
story into the troop formation.' 83 Other police units
fired tear gas.
The milling crowd of 600-700 persons quickly dispersed.
A total of 14 persons were reported treated for minor
injuries, including four U. C. policemen and eight students.
Police made 92 arrests during the day May 20, mostly for
failure to disperse, unlawful assembly and resisting arrest. 84
Demonstrations, rallies and some violence continued
the rest of the week. Groups of street people and some
students would gather to taunt National Guard troops and
police units, shouting insults. Occasionally, there would
be a flurry of rock and bottle throwing and vandalism to
property.
On May 22, National Guard troops and police units made
a series of mass arrests on charges of failure to disperse
and unlawful assembly. A total of 497 persons were arrested
that day. 85
During the period May 15-24, there were a total of 768
arrests (272 University of California students) and 496 non-
students; 92 juveniles were arrested between May 15-22.
About 40% of those arrested were not Berkeley residents. Of
the 450 adults arrested during the mass arrests on May 22,
253 were non-students and 197 were U. C. students. 86
The cost of maintaining the National Guard support
forces at Berkeley has been estimated by the Department
of Finance at almost $50,000 a day. The troops were with-
drawn on June 2, making a total 17 days duty. A preliminary
estimate of the cost was $764,258 for the National Guard
expenses. 87
Additional costs not in that figure would have to
include the overtime costs for local law enforcement units;
logistic costs for all personnel; cost of court expenses
for processing and prosecuting law violators; property
damage to Berkeley businesses and the intangible but con-
siderable loss of business by Berkeley merchants during the
period of militant activity.
-28-
EPILOGUE
There have been allegations that some non-
demonstrators were caught in the street fighting and
suffered injuries, and that some non-demonstrators were
mistakenly detained during large-scale arrests. There
have also been allegations of mistreatment of some per-
sons in the detention facilities at Santa Rita.
Appropriate agencies are conducting official investi-
gations into these allegations and appropriate disciplinary
action has been promised if any of these allegations are
substantiated.
In addition, considerable criticism has been directed
at law enforcement officers and National Guardsmen because
tear gas and shotguns were used to control unruly crowds
at the height of the riots. Noting the critical situation
that confronted his outmanned law enforcement units on
May 15, Sheriff Frank Madigan of Alameda County said the
choice was essentially this: "To use shotguns--because we
didn't have the available manpower -- or retreat and
abandon the city of Berkeley to the mob. S8
WHAT'S AHEAD FOR BERKELEY?
While the situation on "People's Park" has subsided,
other confrontations are possible. A leaflet announcing
a "People's Park Negotiating Committee" mass meeting June 4
declared:
"Thousands marched in the past two and a
half weeks and millions more have watched us fight
for our park. The p. r. (public relations) has
been great, the people dig us, but the fence hasn't
come down.
11
The guard is gone--Berkeley is quiet-
finals start next week and goddamit, we don't have
our park
There will be no real peace in
Berkeley while that fence is up.* Help plan tactics
and strategy to BRING THE FENCE DOWN!"
Whether any new confrontation will involve the "People's
Park" remains to be seen. But any incident can serve as an
excuse for intimidation through mass marches and demonstrations
that have a potential for violence. It must be acknowledged
that there are militants active within this state and this
nation whose avowed aim is to destroy the institutions and
the governmental structure of our society. They make no
secret of these goals.
*Emphasis added.
-29-
A full-page ad on page 16 in the May 30-June 5
edition of the Berkeley Barb announced a 13-point program
for developing the "revolution" in Berkeley. The advertise-
ment was signed by "Several Berkeley Liberation Committees"
and declared:
1
WE WILL MAKE TELEGRAPH AVENUE AND THE SOUTH CAMPUS A
STRATEGIC FREE TERRITORY FOR REVOLUTION
"
.We will resist plans to destroy the South
Campus through University-business expansion and pig
assaults.
Young people leaving their parents
will be welcome with full status as members of our
community. Business on the Avenue should serve the
humanist revolution by contributing their profits
to the community. We will establish cooperative
stores of our own, and combine them within an Avenue
cooperative."
2
WE WILL CREATE OUR REVOLUTIONARY CULTURE EVERYWHERE
#
.We will defy all puritanical restraints
on culture and sex "
3
WE WILL TURN THE SCHOOLS INTO TRAINING GROUNDS FOR
LIBERATION
"
Students must destroy the senile dictator-
ship of adult teachers and bureaucrats. Grading,
tests, tracking, demotions, detentions and expulsions
must be abolished. Pigs and narcs (narcotics agents)
have no place in a people's school
Students will
establish independent educational forms to create
revolutionary consciousness while continuing to
struggle for change in the schools."
4
WE WILL DESTROY* THE UNIVERSITY UNLESS IT SERVES THE
PEOPLE
"
Students should not recognize the false
authority of the regents, administration and faculty.
All students have the right to learn what they want,
from whom they want, and in the manner they decide;
and the right to take political action without academic
penalty.
.
Education can only begin when we're
willing to close the University for what we believe.
=
*Emphasis added.
-30-
5
WE WILL STRUGGLE FOR THE FULL LIBERATION OF WOMEN
AS A NECESSARY PART OF THE REVOLUTIONARY PROCESS
#
We demand the full control of our own
bodies and towards that end will establish free birth
control and abortion clinics. We will choose our own
sexual partners.
We will establish female
communes. "
6
WE WILL TAKE COMMUNAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR BASIC HUMAN
NEEDS
"
Free legal services will be expanded.
Survival needs such as crash pads, free transportation,
switchboards, free phones, and free food will be met. "
7
WE WILL PROTECT AND EXPAND OUR DRUG CULTURE
"
.We relate to the liberating potential of
drugs for both the mind and the body politic. Drugs
inspire us to new possibilities in life which can
only be realized in revolutionary action. We intend
to establish a drug distribution center and a
marijuana cooperative. .We will resist the enforce-
ment of all drug laws in our community.
"
8
WE WILL BREAK THE POWER OF THE LANDLORDS AND PROVIDE
BEAUTIFUL HOUSING FOR EVERYONE
"
.Through rent strikes, direct seizures of
property* and other resistance campaigns, the large
landlords, banks and developers who are gouging higher
rents and spreading ugliness will be driven out. We
shall force them to transfer housing control to the
community
Space will be opened up and living
communes* and revolutionary families will be encouraged."
9
WE WILL TAX THE CORPORATIONS, NOT THE WORKING PEOPLE
"
Berkeley cannot be changed without con-
fronting the industries, banks, insurance companies,
railroads and shipping interests dominating the Bay
Area
.We will demand a direct contribution from
business, including Berkeley's biggest business--the
University, to the community until a nationwide
assault on big business is successful.
"
*Emphasis added.
-31-
10 WE WILL DEFEND OURSELVES AGAINST LAW AND ORDER*
"
We shall abolish the tyrannical police
forces not chosen by the people. States of emergency,
martial law, conspiracy charges and all legalistic
measures used to crush our movement will be resisted by
anymeans necessary- from courtroom to armed struggle. *
The people of Berkeley must arm themselves and learn
the basic skills and tactics of self defense and street
fighting.
We shall make Berkeley a sanctuary for
rebels, outcasts and revolutionary fugitives
=
11 WE WILL CREATE A SOULFUL SOCIALISM IN BERKELEY
"
We will experiment with new ways of living
together such as communal families in which problems
of income, child care and housekeeping are mutually
shared. "
12 WE WILL CREATE A PEOPLE'S GOVERNMENT*
"We will not recognize the authority of the
bureaucratic and unrepresentative local government.
We will ignore elections involving trivial issues
and personalities
We propose a referendum to
dissolve the present government, replacing it with
a decentralized government of neighborhood councils,
workers councils, student unions, and different sub-
cultures. "
13 WE WILL UNITE WITH OTHER MOVEMENTS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
TO DESTROY THIS MOTHERFUCKING RACISTCAPITALISTIMPERIALIST
SYSTEM
"
We will make the American revolution with the
mass participation of all the oppressed and exploited
people. We will actively support the 10-point program
of the Black Panther Party in the black colony.
We will create an International Liberation School in
Berkeley as a training center for revolutionaries
=
*Emphasis added.
-32-
The foregoing "program" printed in the Berkeley
Barb is attached here for informative purposes. Everyone
is free to weigh its message and the threats it contains
according to his own view of whether street corner
"revolutionists" should be taken seriously.
But, before dismissing this hazy mixture of Marxism
and vulgarity as the prattling of a few anonymous
"revolutionaries," it should be remembered that it was
just this sort of anonymous declaration that launched
the "People's Park" controversy.
FOOTNOTES
1. Chancellor Roger B. Heyns, Review of "People's Park"
sequence of events, Speech to U.C. Academic Senate, May 23, 1969
(hereinafter referred to as Heyns, Speech to Academic Senate,
May 23, 1969).
2. City of Berkeley, Permit records.
3-4. Heyns, Speech to Academic Senate, May 23, 1969;
University of California records.
5. University of California, Police Department, Files.
6. City of Berkeley, Police Department, Records and files;
Records and files of other law enforcement agencies and records
of appropriate courts.
7. Daily Californian, May 20, 1969.
8. Chancellor Roger B. Heyns, Statement to U.C. campus
and public, May 13, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as Heyns,
Statement, May 13, 1969).
9. University of California, Office of Public Information,
Statement issued April 30, 1969.
10. Letter from Vice Chancellor Earl F. Cheit, June 2, 1969.
It should be noted that this committee included four students,
together with faculty and other staff members.
11-12. Heyns, Statement, May 13, 1969.
13. Copy of leaflet distributed in South Campus area on
May 9, 1969; mentioned by Heyns in May 23 speech and published
by various newspapers.
14. "Hear Ye, Hear Ye," Berkeley Barb, April 18, 1969.
15. See, for example, letter from Berkeley City Councilman
John DeBonis to DeWitt Higgs, Chairman of the U.C. Board of
Regents, May 7, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as DeBonis, Letter,
May 7, 1969).
16. Files and arrest statistics compiled by Berkeley Police
Department.
FOOTNOTES -- Page Two.
17. California Highway Patrol Officer Newton Joe Prince,
who suffered leg burns in the firebombing assault June 29, 1968,
was readmitted to Franklin Medical Center, San Francisco, on
June 11, 1969 for further surgical skin grafts. His doctor
has advised that it is his opinion that the officer could never
return to regular patrol duty due to the possibility bruises
or lacerations might occur which would not heal as normal,
healthy skin does. In a letter to Governor Ronald Reagan,
dated June 23, 1969, Officer Prince said, "This is the third
time I've been hospitalized as a result of my burns. I thank
God that I'm still alive
I'm proud to be a member of the
California Highway Patrol. The flagrant act of the person or
persons responsible for my burns has altered my life and future
as well as that of my family. I will not be able to return to
normal patrol duty as a traffic officer
For this, I am very
sorry. I enjoyed my work very much."
18. Files and reports maintained by the City of Berkeley
including those of the Berkeley Police Department.
19. DeBonis, Letter, May 7, 1969; also, City of Berkeley
records.
20. Reports on file with the Berkeley Police Department.
21. Berkeley City Manager William Hanley, Statement,
May 18, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as Hanley, Statement,
May 18, 1969).
22. Estimates of damage by City of Berkeley officials,
including City Manager Hanley.
23. Statistical summary of complaints listed with Berkeley
Police Department, April 30-May 14, 1969.
24. Samples of plants dug up at park site and confiscated
by police after the fencing of "People's Park" were identified
as marijuana.
25. Heyns, Statement, May 13, 1969; reviewed in Heyns,
Speech to Academic Senate, May 23, 1969.
26. Heyns, Speech to Academic Senate, May 23, 1969.
27-28. Heyns, Statement, May 13, 1969.
29. Records in the Office of the City Manager, Berkeley.
30. Heyns, Speech to Academic Senate, May 23, 1969. It
should be noted that when the University of California Building
and Campus Development Committee reviewed the original proposal
on June 1, 1967, the then president of the U.C. student body
was invited to attend to represent student views. Minutes of
this meeting show he did not attend.
FOOTNOTES -- Page Three
31. See State of California, Constitution, Art. 9, sec. 9.
32. Hanley, Statement, May 18, 1969; see also Berkely Daily
Gazette, May 19, 1969.
33. San Francisco Chronicle, May 15, 1969; Berkeley
Daily Gazette, May 15, 1969, P. 1.
34. Records of Berkeley and University of California
police; see also San Francisco Examiner, San Jose Mercury,
May 15, 1969.
35. Police logs, files of participating law enforcement
agencies. (Advance intelligence reports indicated that
significant amounts of rocks, bricks and other potential weapons
had been stockpiled in the park area.)
36. Berkeley Police files; Alameda County Sheriff's files;
see also San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Examiner,
May 15, 1969.
37. Files, records of Berkeley Police Department and the
Alameda County Sheriff's Office.
38. Eyewitness report on file with University of California
Police Department.
39. Logs of Berkeley Police Department, Central Command
Post.
40. Application by Michael Lerner on file with U.C. Police
Department; see also Daily Californian, May 15, 1969, p. 5.
41. San Francisco Chronicle, May 15, 1969.
42-43. Eyewitness reports on file with U.C. Police Department.
44. Los Angeles Times, May 16, 1969: also, eyewitness reports
on file with U.C. Police Department.
45. Eyewitness reports on file with U.C. Police Department.
46-47-48. Logs and reports of the Berkeley Police Department
and other law enforcement agencies.
49. Reports by police at scene. See also, Sacramento Bee,
June 8, 1969, quoting Berkeley Detective J.F. Hill reporting
that at least a truckload of bricks, rocks, etc., were picked
up from streets where rioting occurred.
50. San Francisco Examiner, May 15, 1969. Also, police
logs, reports.
FOOTNOTES -- Page Four.
51. San Jose Mercury, May 16, 1969. Also, official
reports of California Highway Patrol.
52-53. Logs of Berkeley Police Department.
54. Interviews with officers involved.
55. Note: It is the policy of the Berkeley Police Department
to withhold public release of the identities of reserve officers
except when required for formal court appearances or pursuant
to other legal process. Police Chief Bruce Baker said this
policy is followed because reserve officers in the past several
years have been subjected to harassment at their houses or
places of business. The names of the two officers and their
official statements are on file with the Berkeley Police Department
56. Letters column, Catholic Voice, June 4, 1969.
57. Interview with Berkeley Police Captain Tom Johnson.
58. Berkeley police logs; eyewitness report by Berkeley
Police Captain Tom Johnson.
59. Logs of Berkeley Police Department.
60. Berkeley Police logs. These logs list at least nine
officially recorded box alarms and fire reports between 1 and
10 p.m., May 15, 1969. At least three were false alarms.
There were also two false bomb threats during this period.
61. Berkeley Police Department, reports, logs.
62. Berkeley Police Department, reports, logs.
63. Statistical summary of arrests, injuries to officers,
manpower report, Berkeley Police Department and other parti-
cipating law enforcement agencies.
64. California, Military and Veterans Code, secs. 146 and
1581.
65. Operational Report, California National Guard.
66. Statistical Summary of Daily Arrests, files of
Berkeley Police Department and other law enforcement agencies
involved.
67. Statistical Summary of Police Casualties, Berkeley
Police Department, Alameda County Sheriff's Office, and
California Highway Patrol.
FOOTNOTES -- Page Five.
68. Survey of Non-Law Enforcement Casualties by Berkeley
City Manager William Hanley, May 18, 1969.
69. The Berkeley Chamber of Commerce, on behalf of mer-
chants in the area, later inquired about goverment loan programs
for merchants suffering loss of business and physical destruction
of property during a riot.
70. Oakland Tribune, May 20, 1969.
71. Los Angeles Times, May 30, 1969. Sacramento Bee,
May 22, 1969.
72. Reports on files with Berkeley Police Department.
Berkeley Daily Gazette, May 24, 1969. San Francisco Examiner-
Chronicle, May 25, 1969.
73. Military and police record on file with San Jose
Police Department and other law enforcement agencies.
74. Operational Report, California National Guard.
75. Logs of Berkeley Police Department and other law
enforcement agencies involved.
76. Operational Report, California National Guard.
Oakland Tribune, May 20, 1969.
77. Compiled from logs of Berkeley Police Department.
78. Operational Report, California National Guard.
79. San Francisco Chronicle, May 21, 1969. Also, police
logs on file.
80. Berkeley Police log at 1:30 p.m. listed a report
that the balcony of the ASUC building "is loaded with rocks
and cement chunks." Deputies assigned to clear ASUC building.
At 2:01 p.m. the Berkeley Police log reported, "ASUC balcony
cleared.
"
81. Berkeley Police logs and California National Guard
report.
82. Berkeley Police log. See also, Oakland Tribune,
May 24, 1969.
83. Operational Report, California National Guard.
84. Compiled from arrest records, Berkeley Police Department:
Oakland Tribune, May 24, 1969.
FOOTNOTES -- Page Six.
85-86. Arrest totals compiled by Berkeley Police Department
and other law enforcement agencies; Oakland Tribune, May 23, 1969.
87. Estimate of costs by Department of Finance, State of
California.
88. Berkeley Daily Gazette, May 30, 1969.