DEBATE OVER CERTIFYING ROSE BOWL'S EIR GOES INTO OT.

Byline: Billy Witz Staff Writer

PASADENA - The Pasadena City Council's debate over whether to certify the Rose Bowl renovation's environmental impact report is a weighty enough issue that it not only spanned over its second Monday night but reached its second continent.

And still there was no resolution at press time.

After three hours of discussion that included councilman Steve Madison weighing in on a static-filled phone line from Bogota, Colombia, where he was on business, the council was still holding the future of the Rose Bowl in its hands.

If the council certifies the EIR and adopts an accompanying statement of overriding consideration - a key statement that would acknowledges that the benefits outweigh the negative impacts of the project - it keeps the Rose Bowl alive when NFL owners meet next week in Washington D.C.

NFL executives say they expect the four stadium sites - Anaheim, the Coliseum, Carson and the Rose Bowl - to be whittled, perhaps down to one, at the meeting.

``The NFL can still say we've chosen to go another direction,'' Councilman Chris Holden said. ``The NFL is an opportunity that sits in front of us. ... This is an opportunity that can benefit the entire community. We've been holding the economics of the bowl together with scotch tape and bubble gum. We need to move beyond that.''

The Rose Bowl received a public boost - albeit a qualified one - when Tournament of Roses CEO Mitch Dorger said the city has addressed the concerns of one of its major constituents in its negotiations with the NFL.

``I felt there were questions in the minds of the City Council about where some people in the organization stood,'' Dorger said later. ``I felt it was important to say something.

Dorger, who said he was speaking as a citizen rather than for his board, emphasized that there were other concerns to be considered, but in the realm of keeping the Rose Bowl a viable facility, he was satisfied.

The city has pledged to see that the Rose Bowl suffers no loss of revenue from the downsizing of the stadium, from its current 88,500 to 65,000 with accommodation for 75,000 for special events such as the Rose Bowl game.

It has proposed that the NFL, under a formula developed by the T of R, make up any financial shortcoming. Dorger said that figure would currently amount to about $2 million per year, comprised mostly of lost ticket revenue, but would also include program and T-shirt sales, and other concessions.

Dorger added that the city is also backing specific guarantees that would be built into the lease that would allow for resodding of the turf in early December and limit the number of games the NFL would be able to play on it in the weeks leading up to the Rose Bowl game.

While the NFL has not agreed to those terms, Dorger said he is confident they will be protected by the city.

``The Rose Bowl is in pretty good shape,'' Dorger told the council. ``It's not a bucket of bolts, but it's a 80-year-old stadium. The proposal in front of you will have significant benefits.''

Much of the discussion Monday night centered around parking, which may be the issue that best exemplifies the tug-of-war between the interests of the NFL and homeowners near the Rose Bowl.

One of the council's objectives when it sent the NFL a list of 15 negotiating terms two years ago was that parking in the Arroyo Seco be reduced from its current 21,000 to about 14,000. This could be managed by reducing the capacity of the Rose Bowl by nearly one-third and by encouraging the use of light rail and shuttle services.

Yet the city now believes it should allow 18,000 cars in the arroyo on game day.

This is in part because analysis showed that keeping too many cars out of the arroyo would overwhelm other parts of Pasadena, particularly Old Town, said city manager Cynthia Kurtz.

Also, and most significantly, several speakers suggested, it is not in the NFL's interest to reduce parking in the arroyo since parking would be one of the key revenue streams for the new owner in that it is not subject to the league's revenue sharing policy.

``It would be wonderful (to reduce arroyo parking), but I think we're all pretty aware that the NFL has pretty strong motivation to not make that happen,'' councilman Steve Haderlein said. ``We're entering a scenario where we're expecting an owner to give up an unshared revenue.''

Billy Witz, [phone]

billy.witz(at)dailynews.com