Undeterred from election results where
Pasadena citizens rejected the NFL at the Rose Bowl with a resounding majority,
our Pasadena City Council is now considering: Allowing up to 5 years of NFL
games at the Rose Bowl!!!
They are doing this without adequately informing the voting
public, which already voted NO to the NFL in 2005 with the support
of current Mayor Bogaard, who then argued it would bring too much traffic,
displace park users from the Arroyo Seco, and threaten the historic status of
the 83 year old stadium.
Mayor Bogaard: Please stand with Pasadena City residents again and
Pasadena City Council Members: Please do your diligence and honestly educate your citizens as to the risks to health and the environment! Please vote NO on the DEIR! Please DO NOT change Chapter 3.32 of the Pasadena Municipal Code
Renting to the NFL would increase from 12 to 25 the number
of "large scale" events held at the Rose Bowl (> 20,000 attendance)
each year. This is more than a 100% increase! Such a move will displace thousands of peaceful,
socioeconomically and racially diverse residents now using our parks, pools,
and recreation facilities each week (softball, baseball, soccer, dog training,
aquatic center, golf, aerobics, jogging, etc...) who come from Pasadena and surrounding communities. It will also create untold
havoc for local Pasadena neighborhoods and businesses as residents may avoid
much of the area for long stretches of time on game days. Crime will likely increase, as will noise, traffic, garbage,
damage to facilities, and air pollution. Emergency services (police, fire,
medical) will likely be compromised to the Pasadena area as a result. The Environmental Impact Report, for which Pasadena paid ca.
$400,000, is incredibly naive and lacking in scholarship and transparency. It
in no way measures accurately the environmental impact to our Pasadena
neighborhoods or local wildlife. The study seems to target the result the City Council/RBOC was seeking (i.e., no significant environmental consequence), rather than providing a fair and unbiased assessment. Those of us that live in Pasadena know full well the impact
of big UCLA games and annual Rose Bowl game days. While we celebrate these
occasions and our historic Rose Bowl, do we want to add 13 more per year, all
packed into the same 5 month period, just so the NFL can play here and the RBOC and benefit? The SRNA Board of Directors recently voted to
OPPOSE the proposed temporary use of the Rose Bowl by the National Football
League (NFL). SRNA joins the Linda Vista Annandale Association (LVAA) in this
action. This position is supportive of The Governors Advisory Panel Report from
the Urban Land Institute (ULI) urging Pasadena not to offer the Rose Bowl as a
temporary NFL home.
join us in opposition
by signing this petition!
oppose renting the Rose Bowl to an NFL team over a temporary 5 year period, a
shorter period, or permanently. I also oppose the Pasadena City Council
proposed change to the Pasadena Municipal Code (Chapter 3.32) that would allow
25, instead of the current 12, displacement events at the Rose Bowl each year
over a temporary 5 year period, a shorter period, or permanently, as such a
change would have a profoundly negative impact on the quality of life of
Pasadena residents and neighboring communities (e.g., South Pasadena, Eagle Rock, La Canada-FlintRidge, Sierra Madre, Arcadia, San Marino, Highland Park, etc)."
Want to lend an opposing hand? Contact:
Also, send comments directly to the City of Pasadena at:
Also, send comments directly to the Mayor at:
(No Sponsor Information)
Help spread the word about this petition. Copy the code below and paste it into your website or blog to help promote this petition.
The views expressed in this petition are solely those of the petition's sponsor and do not in any way reflect the views of iPetitions. iPetitions is solely a provider of technical services to the petition sponsor and cannot be held liable for any damages or injury or other harm arising from this petition. In the event no adequate sponsor is named, iPetitions will consider the individual account holder with which the petition was created as the lawful sponsor.