Ridge blasts FAA, site of Rams’ future stadium

The NFL eight months ago approved the St. Louis Rams’ relocation to Los Angeles based on the team’s plan for a major stadium development in Inglewood, selected over a more suburban proposal. Now, with the Rams eagerly eyeing 2019 for their move-in date, former head of Homeland Security Tom Ridge blasted the Federal Aviation Administration for failing to aggressively oversee the planned stadium, and called for the venue to move because terrorists could attack it.

His nine-page report, to be released Monday and obtained by SportsBusiness Journal, raised the specter of terrorists flying planes from nearby Los Angeles International Airport into the stadium, planned for the former site of Hollywood Park racetrack.

“It is a fact that LAX has been a terrorist target in the past,” Ridge wrote. “As an icon of American culture, mobility, and economic power around the globe, it will continue to be so. The facts are indisputable that aviation assets and sporting venues are now clearly in the sights of terrorist organizations.

“The Rams are presently beginning a season at the Los Angeles Coliseum. Surely there are other sites in the area where a new stadium could be located without layering such significant risk. When other potentially safer options are available, locating an NFL stadium at Hollywood Park is not effective 21st Century risk management.”

Ridge wrote a similar report in December 2014 as a consultant to the Anschutz Corp., whose subsidiary AEG was at the time in competition to deliver an NFL stadium site in Los Angeles. Ridge remains on retainer as security consultant to the Anschutz Corp.

However, Ridge’s spokesman said the former Pennsylvania governor is so concerned about what he views as flawed FAA oversight that he wrote the follow-up report on his own and not for Anschutz or any outside entity. Ridge urges the FAA to work with defense agencies and hold public hearings.

The FAA in November 2015 issued a notice of presumed hazard on the Inglewood site, though that document dealt with the proposed venue interfering with LAX radar. That notice is still outstanding, and under California law a building permit can’t be issued (excavation presumably can begin).

“When the FAA begins evaluating proposed structures, we solicit input from various agencies, including the Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security,” an FAA spokesman said. “Both agencies had the opportunity to review the proposed Inglewood stadium project. Neither agency objected to the proposal.”

It is not known whether either department took the opportunity to review the proposal or how extensive that review might have been.

The Rams declined to comment on the report, saying it would not be appropriate to do so because the report was not sent to them.

“Security is always the shared top priority for us and the NFL,” the Rams said. “We will continue to work with the NFL and numerous private, state, local and federal agencies to ensure a safe environment for our fans.”

In mid-August, before Ridge’s second report, Kevin Demoff, the Rams’ chief operating officer, told SportsBusiness Journal that the FAA issue is not holding up construction of the stadium. Groundbreaking should begin in September or October, he said.

Cleared for landing?



■ January 2013: St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke buys 60-acre Hollywood Park site

■ December 2014: Former head of Homeland Security Tom Ridge issues report for Anschutz Corp. describing possible stadium as a risk to air traffic because of its proximity to LAX

■ January 2015: Kroenke announces plan to build stadium on site

■ June 2015: Kroenke applies to the FAA to build near the airport

■ November 2015: The FAA issues notice of presumed hazard against stadium, contending air traffic control radar could be affected negatively by the stadium (notice was still in effect as of last week)

■ January 2016: NFL owners approve Rams’ relocation to L.A.; new stadium is scheduled to open in 2019

■ August 2016: Ridge issues new report criticizing the FAA for oversight failure, calling for venue to be built elsewhere Source: SportsBusiness Journal research



“We are having good, productive conversations with the FAA,” he said then. “It could be tomorrow,” he said when asked when he expected the notice of presumed hazard to be cured.

A source familiar with the talks said one cure for the FAA notice of presumed hazard would be for LAX to buy new satellite radar equipment that would negate the technical issue, in which air traffic controllers might see false images of incoming planes because of radar bouncing off the stadium roof. That clearly would not satisfy Ridge, who calls the radar issue a technical one and argues that the FAA is concerning itself solely with such issues rather than the broader notion of whether large projects such as stadiums should be built near busy airports in the post-9/11 era.



Ridge, whose first report was dismissed in many quarters because Anschutz paid for it, hit back in the second report, writing that his concerns were rejected by those with financial ties to the project.

“The concerns I first raised in December 2014 prompted a coordinated response on the part of those with vested financial interests in the Inglewood/Hollywood Park site,” he wrote. “The report was dismissed out of hand by the mayor of Inglewood, misrepresented in the local paper of record, and was the target of a public relations campaign that sought to discredit the report.”

Ridge contends that the fear of terrorism is only more pronounced since his initial report, which came before deadly attacks in Paris and Orlando, and that the NFL should step in and open the process to public debate.

“As a good corporate citizen, it is in the NFL’s best interests to ensure that a public discussion of safety and security issues surrounding such a signature league venue has been facilitated,” he wrote.

In January, an NFL source said the league had conducted a safety study for the proposed stadium. Ridge’s successor at Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, wrote the report, which came to the conclusion that the stadium did not pose a security risk.

Sarah Biser, a partner with Fox Rothschild who represents larger construction projects, agreed with Ridge that more transparency is better for projects like this. She has previously sided with the Rams on the technical issues involved with the FAA notice of presumed hazard, but said on a matter like safety the process should be as open as possible.



