Council Meets in Special Closed Session to Discuss Use of the Rose Bowl Game Name

The City Council met in a special closed session meeting on Tuesday primarily to discuss the use of the name “Rose Bowl Game” for a football game that is not being played at the iconic stadium.

As of early Wednesday morning no report had come out of the meeting.

According to the Ralph M. Brown Act, the state’s open meeting law, the city must publicly report any action taken in closed session. 

Reporting may be deferred under certain circumstances, including lawsuit settlements, usually because legal action is often contingent upon approval by another party.

City officials would not comment on the closed session agenda when contacted by Pasadena Now.

Local residents called on the council to deny the CFP the use of the name. 

The College Football Playoffs moved the semifinal game from the historic stadium to Arlington, Texas due to a state order that bans fans and family members of players from viewing sporting events, including the game between Alabama and Notre Dame, in person.

In some news stories Sunday, it was reported that the game would be called the Rose Bowl Game. Although the College Football Playoff can move the game, the CFP has no rights to the name, which is co-owned by the city and the Tournament of Roses. The CFP cannot call the game the Rose Bowl Game without a vote of the City Council authorizing its use. 

City officials would not discuss the item before the meeting, but

Gov. Gavin Newsom defended the decision to deny a request to allow fans and family members to attend the game during his coronavirus briefing on Monday. 

“When you’re in Southern California, you’re zero percent ICU capacity, we can’t make exceptions,” Newsom said. “We have to be stringent in terms of our rules and regulations. We’ve got to do everything in our power to mitigate spread and to mitigate mixing. And so, what they asked for was contrary to that determination and to our medium and long-term goals,” Newsom said.

Eads appealed twice to the state to allow family members of players inside the stadium but was denied both times.

“Do not allow the cherished names Rose Bowl or Rose Bowl Game to be used anywhere outside of Pasadena,” said Wayne Hunt, branding and graphic designer adjunct professor at ArtCenter College of Design in a public comment to be read at the meeting.

“Brands are powerful and valuable properties. They take decades to develop, enter the public consciousness and to reflect positively on the owning entity and its many constituencies,” Hunt said. 

“But this value can quickly erode if allowed to become associated with anything other than its origin,” Hunt wrote.

“Rose Bowl and Rose Bowl Game are the two most valuable names and brands in our city. And both are among the top sports/venue brands in the U.S. The Rose Bowl is also internationally recognized with an enduring halo effect on the image of Pasadena. A branding appraisal would likely place a value on these famous brands in the millions of dollars. If we allow a Rose Bowl Game to be played in Texas we essentially say that we don’t value the exclusivity of the Rose Bowl and even the unique qualities of Pasadena,” Hunt wrote.

“The Rose Bowl is about a place — a specific place here in Pasadena. The Rose Bowl Game is about a specific event in a specific place, Pasadena’s Rose Bowl. For a nationally televised event from Texas to be even nominally associated with the Rose Bowl and with Pasadena is wrong.

“I don’t think we would tolerate our Rose Parade to take place in Dallas, so don’t allow our cherished Rose Bowl brands to be exported and diminished either,” Hunt wrote.

“Yes, move this year’s game, but don’t let them profit from and diminish our beloved and valuable brands by literally exporting the Rose Bowl to Texas.”