What lies beneath the Trop

So many of you probably have seen our story from the weekend about the environmental conditions at Tropicana Field. If you haven't, you can read it here. We started working on the story before the Rays' announced plans to put off a stadium referendum, but decided to publish the story anyway since the redevelopment of Tropicana Field will no doubt be key.

The big take away from our reporting is that most experts -- even the environmental lawyer working with people opposed to the Rays' waterfront plans -- agree that the environmental situation isn't a deal breaker. It will just take time and some smart people.

What do you think?

Rays response on enviro issues at new ballpark

The dredge and fill is down to .4 acres, the Rays report in this newest correspondence with the city.

UPDATE: The link should work now.

Risk vs. reward: 1986 and 2008

Deputy Editor of Editorials Tim Nickens, who covered the debate over building a domed stadium downtown  as a young reporter for the Times in 1986, compares the city's risks  then and now.

In 1986, City Council voted to build the dome entirely with public money. There was no guarantee the city would ever get a baseball team. There was no viable ownership group, only the unlikely alliance of the civic-minded parent of the local utility company and a Sarasota developer.

Nickens writes:  "Several City Council members made short speeches before the vote. One stuck with me. The late J.W. Cate Jr. remembered riding a merry-go-round as a child and never reaching for a brass ring. I looked up his exact words again the other day.

"There's a brass ring there, my friends,'' Cate said just before the vote, "and I'm going to risk the thing this time.''

Fast-forward 22 years.

City response to DEP: Go to ...

The story about the DEP deed restriction changed mightily from the time I posted it on this blog yesterday afternoon until it hit papers this morning. Read the updated version here.