Rose Bowl Deal Appears in Peril

Pasadena’s courtship with the NFL could be nearing an end.

Although no decision was made as of late Monday, the city councilman believed to be the swing vote said he is “not ready to support the NFL at the Rose Bowl.”

“The impacts are too great, especially for my district,” said Councilman Steve Madison, who represents the neighborhoods around the 83-year-old stadium. “And the risks are too uncertain.”

Madison’s comments were surprising in that he was widely believed to be in favor of an NFL deal.

For more than four hours, the council weighed the issue and heard from more than two dozen Pasadena residents, the majority of whom were vehemently against a proposed $500-million renovation of the landmark stadium.

The council, which last month certified an environmental impact report for the proposed renovation, was expected to vote on two issues: whether the benefits of an NFL deal outweigh the impacts, and terms for a potential agreement with the league, which has been considering the Rose Bowl for nearly three years.

Backers of the NFL proposal say striking a deal with the nation’s No. 1 sports league will secure the economic future of the 83-year-old stadium, which they say is losing $2 million per year. To cover the costs associated with the Rose Bowl, the city in part uses the money generated by the golf course adjacent to the stadium. The city is in the process of paying off stadium-improvement bonds issued in 1991 and ’96.

“The Rose Bowl as a facility loses money each year, and the future prospects are not that encouraging,” said Jay Goldstone, Pasadena’s director of finance.

But opponents of bringing pro football to Pasadena, among them Mayor Bill Bogaard, argue that the $2-million figure is a gross overstatement. They also believe there are other ways to pay off those bonds and, over the next decade, make the required capital improvements to the stadium, which has a contract with UCLA through 2023.

The Rose Bowl Operating Co. recently submitted a memo to the City Council giving an estimated cost of $150,000 to explore non-NFL alternatives for the stadium.

Councilman Steve Haderlein received a round of applause at Monday’s meeting when he suggested that the council consider allocating those so-called Plan B funds.

Haderlein got an even louder ovation when he said, “My view of the NFL deal as it currently stands is that it’s not a good one for Pasadena.”

The applause was so loud and vigorous, Bogaard had to step in to restore order.

Later, for more than two hours, the council listened to comments from Pasadena residents. Many of the speakers expressed their fears about increased traffic, noise and the loss of parkland.