Pasadena Says “Farewell” to the NFL. Just About.

 

The City of Pasadena has now officially slammed the door shut on the possibility of the NFL ever taking out a lease for a home team to play in the Rose Bowl. Almost.

Back in April, the City Council certified the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2107 Arroyo Seco Music & Arts Festival at the Rose Bowl and Brookside Golf Course. The EIR also stated that the planned Festival and the NFL could not occur in the same year. The planned festival is currently contracted for five years.

A week later, the City Council — voting on an Ordinance change related to the Festival — discussed whether “Section 3.32.275,” which increased the number of “displacement events” allowed at the Rose Bowl and which made room on the calendar for NFL games, should be removed from the Municipal Code.

Then, on May 10, 2016, according to a staff report, the RBOC Board of Directors recognized that “it is extremely likely that the festival will continue for at least three years (through 2019), and it is also highly likely that the NFL stadium in Inglewood that is scheduled to be built by 2019, will be complete and the opportunity for the stadium to host the NFL will be gone.”

The City had already passed on an opportunity to host NFL games two years ago, not even bothering to respond to a request for proposals from the NFL.

Accordingly, the RBOC Board recommended to the City Council that, after the first “successful” Festival occurs, the ordinance allowing more events at the Rose Bowl to accommodate NFL games should be eliminated. Thus the Council took up that recommendation on Monday evening.

The key word here? “Successful.”

As activist and nearby Rose Bowl resident Nina Chomsky suggested, the Council debated whether the word “successful” should be removed from the ordinance. In other words, the Council debated if the city should permanently eliminate the possibility of the NFL ever taking up residence at the Rose Bowl, whether or not the upcoming music festival was successful or not?

As Mayor Tornek asked, rhetorically, “The contract is signed, the NFL is done, why are we qualifying this?”

Councilmember Steve Madison agreed, saying, “We have been consistent in walking away from the NFL.”

Councilmember Victor Gordo offered that the wording was “litigation protection.” When Councilmember John Kennedy asked, “What kind of litigation protection?,” City Attorney Michelle Bagneris explained, “There is always the threat of litigation in any contract,” and proffered that should the music festival not happen, for any reason, then the threat of litigation might loom large.

Tornek then agreed that the wording was prudent, and the motion was passed unanimously. The ordinance would take effect next year at a date to be agreed upon, following the first “successful” festival.