The city of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl operator on Monday filed a petition in Los Angeles County Superior Court for a preliminary injunction and a temporary restraining order to prevent them from leaving the Rose Bowl or terminating their stadium lease until the pending lawsuit against the school is resolved.
The complaint alleges that the plaintiffs will suffer “immediate and irreparable harm if the status quo is not maintained during the pendency of this action.” The hearing is tentatively scheduled for Wednesday morning.
Last week, that forced them to stay in the Rose Bowl until the end of the 2043 season.
UCLA issued a statement saying it was still considering the home for its football, but a person familiar with the university’s thinking on the matter later confirmed to the Times that it would do so if the Bruins decided to head to SoFi Stadium.
“There is no way to surface that. UCLA has confirmed its impending departure, significantly destabilizing Plaintiffs’ core businesses, which are structured around and dependent on UCLA. Absent confirmation that UCLA intends to honor its contractual commitments, Plaintiffs are deprived of the ability to plan and manage the stadium schedule and ongoing operations, at least while this litigation is pending,” the plaintiffs argued in Monday’s filing. This includes developing and securing future business partners and opportunities, retaining talent, and maintaining trust among the many vendors and sponsors that rely on UCLA football.
“Equally alarming is the precedent that UCLA is seeking to set. Public-private partnerships for stadiums and arenas, and the financing that makes them possible, are subject to enforceable long-term contracts, the terms of which are typically subject to public debt incurred. UCLA’s attempts to break out of decades-old contracts critically undermine these structures.”
