Staff Photo by BERNARDO ALPS

Officials seek higher profits, happy neighbors

By Gabe Lacques
Staff Writer

Lee Zanteson has been alternately amused and enraged by the politics of the Rose Bowl.

In 1957, Zanteson bought his first house in Pasadena's Linda Vista neighborhood. He's lived in the neighborhood ever since, and in the ensuing 44 years has seen use of the hulking facility skyrocket.

Increased activity has led to occasionally contentious political debate over how to best use the facility. And while ordinances have been passed, revised and re-heated since then, there's one certainty when it comes to Rose Bowl politics.

"My joke is, a city councilman's enthusiasm for Rose Bowl events is in direct proportion to how far he lives from the Rose Bowl," Zanteson said.

Zanteson just so happens to live very close to the Rose Bowl, and over the years he's played an active role in resident affairs. As the Arroyo chairman for the Linda Vista-Annandale Association, he worked on the Central Arroyo Master Plan and has been a voice for those who don't want their quality of life (and, possibly, their property values) compromised by a constant stream of events at the stadium.

"We would not be disappointed if it vanished," he said. "In a hypothetical sense, we'd be thrilled. To the general quality of life here, it's probably a detriment. We could put in another 18 holes of the golf course -- the golf course makes money -- and put the rest into the park. You'd have a lot more park down there.

"But the Rose Bowl and Pasadena are synonymous. To say get it out of here, that's not feasible. So you find the best way you can to live with it, try to make it as quiet as possible, and get on with your life. It's not going to go away."

And neither are the neighbors. But the good news is, the gap between the pro-stadium faction and pro-neighborhood factions appears to be closing.

Cause for Concern
Arroyo Seco residents put up with a lot on Rose Bowl game days. They must arrange to pick up passes for friends if they happen to have guests. Then they're pretty much stuck in their homes for the two hours preceding a game and two hours following it.

And in cases like Pink Floyd's tour stop in 1994, the noise can be more than a little annoying.

"You could hear them at the intersection of Angeles Crest and Foothill" in La Canada Flintridge, miles away, notes Zanteson. "Imagine how bad it was down here."

So the tug-of-war between resident rights and revenue reaping was born. But right now, Parker says, there may be peace in our time.

"In general, there's pretty good vibes," says Norm Parker, president of the Linda Vista-Annandale Association. "We think the Rose Bowl is now being fairly responsible about their activities and their impact on the neighborhood. They're very open and willing to listen to us if we have a problem.

"And that's an improvement, the last couple of years particularly. I just think there wasn't as much attention being paid or information offered to the community previously."

That's a good thing for Rose Bowl officials, who must increase revenue without agitating the neighbors.

So far, they've walked the fine line well.

A recent revision to the Arroyo Seco Ordinance -- which was enacted in the 1980s -- enables the Rose Bowl to stage up to 25 major events (exceeding 20,000 in attendance) per year. The previously established number was 12.

Any major events beyond 12 had to be approved by City Council vote, which severely hampered stadium workers' efforts to land major concerts.

"It sends a message that we want business," Rose Bowl General Manager Darryl Dunn said. "It helps from the promoters' perspective. They've been great in their understanding of the situation we have currently, and also recognize challenges we have going forward."

But with large concert acts few and far between, the stadium likely won't come close to filling 25 dates with major events. Stadium use peaked in 1994, when the Pink Floyd booking and the men's World Cup boosted the number to 20.

Retention and attraction of major tenants have been identified as the Rose Bowl's best chance to maintain itself, and generate greater revenue for the city. And that's where the honeymoon between the neighborhood and stadium would end.

Not For Long?
It's been seven years since the National Football League had a presence here, in the nation's second-largest media market. With no expansion on the horizon, a relocating team would be the only option for the Los Angeles area.

A team in Los Angeles would also enable the region to host a Super Bowl, which it hasn't done since the 1993 game was played at the Rose Bowl. That, says L.A. Sports Council President David Simon, would almost be reason enough for the NFL to place a team here. Simon was part of the host committee that landed the '93 game.

"The NFL really likes Pasadena and the Rose Bowl," he said. "At the time they were here, they told us it was their favorite place for the Super Bowl up to that time. First of all, the 100,000 seats is something they haven't had since. The more seats, the more tickets they can offer sponsors.

"Second, the area around the Rose Bowl is great for ancillary events -- like the NFL Experience -- which are so important now. Plus, I don't want to knock them, but look at other cities that hosted the game since '93, and you say, 'where would the NFL and its sponsors rather go in January?"'

But the last thing the NFL wants to do is spend its own money. Cities awarded expansion teams (and relocated ones) have been willing to publicly finance new stadiums. When Los Angeles failed to produce a unified front, the NFL went with Houston and billionaire owner Bob McNair for its 32nd team, which will begin play in 2002.

The Rose Bowl, lacking very many luxury boxes and amenities the NFL craves, would need a major face lift, probably to the tune of $200-$300 million.

"If we got in a discussion with an NFL team, we may provide some structural approaches that may help, but in the end, the city may not take on any liability for that debt," Councilman Bill Crowfoot said. "It would be a deal where we lease out the stadium, we get back a revenue stream, and if the debt craters, it hits someone else's pocket. I would not put residents at risk for that. I would demolish it, build another golf course.

"To fill a stadium, year after year, for 20 years, that's a trick. To have $200 million riding on that bet, that's a big bet."

It would require creative, and unprecedented, deal-striking with the NFL. The only trump card the city would hold is the NFL's desire to again have a presence in the No. 2 media market.

Porfirio Frausto, the Rose Bowl Operating Company's president, said such an arrangement would be a panacea for the stadium.

"You would have a state-of-the-art stadium with both a history and a future," he said. "This stadium would have all the bells and whistles, plus the history of the Four Horsemen and all the rest of it. If it gets an NFL team, it becomes America's Stadium. It would be the stadium of the United States. What stadium could measure up to it?"

But the city's NFL backers wouldn't be fighting just the league and financial pitfalls to make it happen. Invite the NFL, and the stadium's peaceful relationship with its neighbors will surely turn contentious again.

"We'd hire the hit men," Zanteson promised. "We would absolutely, vehemently, violently oppose it. Fortunately, I think it's unlikely."

Parker said the neighborhood feels the NFL brings a rowdier, messier presence than the Galaxy or UCLA ever did.

Councilman Steve Madison, who represents the Linda Vista area, echoed as much, particularly if a certain silver-and-black-clad team were to return to Los Angeles.

"If you told me the Oakland Raiders were moving to the Rose Bowl, I would find it very difficult to find a scenario where I'd support that," he said. "All due respect to (owner) Al Davis, but I don't know if the Raiders would bring the right kind of crowd and attitude to West Pasadena. I'm not sure our neighborhood is a place to have an NFL team permanently domiciled."

Now What?
With its legacy secure and its future anything but, the stadium -- and those who control it -- must ultimately decide if it will be a relic, a historical site, or a multiuse facility. Whatever path is taken will no doubt be watched closely by those living in its wake.

"City government would be irresponsible if the stadium were used in a way that it caused the people around to think living in Pasadena is too much of a pain in the (rear)," Crowfoot said. "We want those people to live in our city. We don't want to drive them away, which means we have to find a happy medium to use our stadium effectively, but not in a way that drives people nuts."

Madison says press the residents hard enough, and they'll even admit they like the place a little bit.

"There's an old joke in Linda Vista that the residents will complain about the Rose Bowl until the day they put their house on the market," he says, "and then in the advertisement they'll say, 'Adjacent to the Rose Bowl.' There's a lot of people in the area who love the Rose Bowl and wish it were rented out more."

Within reason, of course. The NFL coming to Pasadena is probably a pipe dream, which means the city will constantly be toeing the fiscally responsible line. Parker admits his neighbors can empathize with that.

"The city has an obligation to fulfill, too," he says. "We keep a watchful eye; we don't want them to slip in their neighborhood diligence. So far, they haven't."

Now, like a "Let's Make a Deal" contestant, the city faces three options. City officials and industry analysts tend to agree that the status quo probably keeps the stadium viable, but barely. A new major tenant -- like the NFL -- would help modernize the stadium, and most likely pump more money into the city.

A loss of any current tenant, and all bets are off.

The final scenario is what worries Crowfoot, whose eight-year term as a city councilman ends May 7.

"I make some relatively strong statements in favor of the NFL not because I support professional teams, but because I look at it as until next month, I'm one of the people responsible for our city's economic prosperity," he said recently. "The Rose Bowl plays too much of a role in the city's self-image and image around the world for us to ignore it.

"To ignore the Rose Bowl, to allow it to become a hulk, would be irresponsible for Pasadena. That's the bottom line."

-- Gabe Lacques can be reached at (626) 962-8811, Ext. 2239, or at gabe.lacques@sgvn.com. 

 Rose Bowl - Thorny Issues  |  Pasadena could learn from Orange Bowl