Finally some actual news about the Tampa Bay Rays stadium roof situation, courtesy of the St. Pete Catalyst, one of those nonprofit news sites springing up that could no doubt use your subscription money if you have some burning a hole in your pocket for other reasons. The Catalyst got hold of emails (it didn’t say, whether via a public records request or leaks) revealing that city building officials met with representatives of roof construction firm Dunn Lightweight the day after Hurricane Milton tore the roof off of Tropicana Field, and that company was at least initially ready to take a shot at having the roof replaced by Opening Day 2025:
In a Friday, Oct. 11 email sent after visiting the site, Javier Rattia, partner director for Dunn Lightweight, noted that his firm was under a “very tight schedule” to dismantle and replace Tropicana Field’s roof in time for the 2025 season.
“We will airfreight some of the materials and use most of our stock to achieve this monumental task,” Rattia wrote.
The next day, Dunn signed an agreement with the city to just dismantle and remove the existing roof, at a cost not to exceed $548,534. Nine days later, however, the city hired Global Rope Access to provide seven “rope technicians” to remove the roof at a cost of $416,353. (The Catalyst didn’t attempt to explain the discrepancy; I’ve reached out to Dunn and GRA to try to clarify.)
All this could either mean 1) St. Pete is giving up on trying to replace the roof, despite Dunn’s willingness to give it a go, 2) St. Pete is just working on cleaning up the debris for now while it evaluates the possibility of repair, or 3) something else, probably, this is one of the hazards of writing articles based entirely on email records. But it definitely tracks with the idea that nobody has yet figured out if the stadium roof is reparable, what it would cost, or how long it would take, though presumably Rays and city officials are working on that.
Speaking of which, somebody asked MLB commissioner Rob Manfred during World Series batting practice what he thought the timeline was, and he came up with a date:
“I think by Christmas they gotta have a pretty good plan in place, and there’s a lot to that.”…
“They’re still in the damage assessment mode,” Manfred said. “That needs to get done and obviously, it’s not just the roof, there was damage internally as well. Won’t know exactly what’s going to happen until they complete that process. … It’s just a guess as to how long it’s going to be.”
That’s hardly definitive, even before Manfred got to “just a guess”: What does that even mean to “have a pretty good plan in place”? Do Rays execs have to know for sure where they’ll be playing at the start of 2025, or just have various contingencies in place? When to MLB’s schedule makers need to know, so they can adjust game and travel times if necessary? Quick, somebody ask Manfred some followups — nope, he’s already on to the next thing:
“We can make it work in a minor-league park,” Manfred said. “I think there’s probably some flexibility in terms of what we do with the big-league schedule.”
Probably! This is not really helpful at all, even if it did get the Athletic some quotes to justify an article to lure you behind the New York Times’ paywall. Somebody get the St. Pete Catalyst (or Hell Gate, they’re in town already) a World Series press pass already so we can get some actual damn answers.
There are financial implications on the narrow issue of the Trop’s actual roof replacement on BOTH the Rays and St. Pete…meaning, the team may not want to invest the money either on a short-term solution given the limited life of this stadium’s usage. It’s not just down to the city and what they want to do. The reason is that the city’s insurance policy covers only a portion, with the Rays being responsible for overages. If the total cost of a replacement roof is $200M, as an example, and the city’s policy only covers a portion of that – do the Rays want to cover the remainder?
Where are you hearing that the Rays are responsible for what the insurance doesn’t cover? I haven’t seen that reported anywhere.
Brodie Brazil has reported it. He has 2 videos on YouTube — and the insurance piece he covered had Bloomberg as the source.
I’m requoting from his slide here:
From Bloomberg
“The team’s lease agreement at Tropicana Field stipulates that the Rays are SOLEY responsible for the cost of any capital repairs, renewals or replacements EXCEEDING available insurance proceeds and the funds available in an escrow account that the team had been contributing to over the length of their lease”
The Times and the Catalyst generally leave a lot out – there’s more afoot.
Hmm, interesting. That seems to be from here:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-10-11/mets-highest-payroll-in-mlb-pays-off-in-trip-to-nlcs-vs-padres-or-dodgers
We have a contradiction, then, with the TBNweekly story cited below. Let me look into this.
It looks like yes, according to the original lease, anything not covered by insurance or the escrow fund is the responsibility of the Rays.
Now we just need to know: 1) How much is in the escrow fund, and 2) Did any of the lease amendments change that arrangement?
Found both the original lease and the amendments, and it does look like the original deal for repairs stands (see the 7th amendment):
https://www.fieldofschemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Stadium-Agreement.pdf
https://www.fieldofschemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Stadium-Agreement-Amendments.pdf
My question now: The lease obligates the city to “pay all reasonable costs and expenses” related to “property insurance” (Section 6.01b), but the city reduced its insurance coverage early this year to save on premiums. Could Sternberg claim this is a breach of contract and sue for damages? Any contract law experts out there who could take a look and see if this could end up in court? (I mean, this is American, anything can end up in court, but could the Rays have a reasonable case?)
OOOO, that is very interesting, thanks. Looks like lawyers, guns and money will be required… as usual in these types of cases.
I would wonder if the city unilaterally reduced it’s coverage (not an unreasonable action on replacement cost for a building you have no intention of replacing in kind…) or if they had the tenant’s consent to accept reduced insurance (which would have been prudent).
Many unanswered questions here…
John:
“…Dad get me out of this!”
—–Warren Zevon
It would be highly unusual for a tenant to be responsible for “coinsurance” liabilities, but it is certainly not impossible.
Typically the landlord (of a residential, commercial or as in this case, effectively a single purpose structure) is under contract to the tenant to provide a premise suitable for the tenant’s intended and permitted use – in this case Major League baseball games. If the premises are or become unusable for the intended purpose, the lease is typically voided in the event the landlord does not make them suitable again within a reasonable time frame.
I supposed it is possible that the contract may not specify that the roof has to be in place, but the team is leasing a facility that came with a roof. And in Florida, having a functional roof would seem to be something a sports tenant would want to write into the lease itself…
Maybe the city/county can get away with saying “we’ll remove the roof and fix all the legitimate damage to make the facility useable, but we aren’t replacing the roof”.
As Neil said elsewhere, though, drainage and other considerations (electrical infrastructure for outdoor locations is significantly different from that required for indoor locations, for example) make this an unlikely proposition.
“The city, which is responsible for the repairs, is meeting ‘consistently’ with the Rays, Welch added.”
https://www.tbnweekly.com/sports/article_cfbe0ef8-954d-11ef-8587-138d33e0779a.html
Is it wrong for Manfred to not tell everyone the plans for next season 2 weeks after the stadium was damaged? While there should be a plan in place for how teams would function if each stadium should be inoperable for a period of time from a week to a whole season, I don’t see why it is our right to know 5 months before opening day.
“We don’t know yet” is a perfectly good answer. “They’ll have to decide by Christmas” raises lots of questions — what happens if it still isn’t clear by then? do they have to have a permanant plan by Christmas or just a plan for Opening Day? — that Manfred didn’t volunteer answers on and the Athletic doesn’t seem to have followed up about.
Timelines are meant to be moved — the Christmas date that Manfred trotted out sound more like a suggestion than a demand. Now, if it’s spring training time and they still have no answers, then it would be panic time.
Yeah! What he said.
Look, I’ve been up front with you all about the fact that there is a plan. You may not know what it is. I may not know what it is. But you know and I know that there is a plan and the plan will be suited to the situation that is required to be planned for.
We are working with the Rays. We are working with the city and county. We are working with all levels of government and all levels of persons everywhere. Rest assured, we are not resting, we are working. Flat out. There is no stone that we have not unsterned.
It is my job to be prepared for this type of occurrence of a situation just like this. And I am prepared, just as you would want me to be. Major League Baseball does not make hurricanes. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t fully ready for them when they are thrust upon us, no matter by whom or where or when. Because we are.
Anyone know where I can order a few thousand cases of bounty?
Sounds just like him LOL!
I mean it seems silly to spend anything substantial to keep the stadium for 3 years when they are already replacing it. Might as well tear it down and accelerate the construction of the new stadium. They don’t draw well at the current stadium anyway. Just add some extra seats to the baseball stadium at Disney World or George Steinbrenner Field and let them play the next 3 years.
MLB would likely bend the “MLB BALLPARK STANDARDS” rules by not forcing ANY replacement ballpark to add more seats for the Rays. This is an unprecedented event. Millions of dollars in TV Revenue MLB could stand to lose by stringing this deal out any longer than need be. The Trop is done. The city is likely trying to salvage the roof for the 100s of other revenue generating events planned for the Trop that are non-baseball related (concerts, christmas village, etc). The Rays, meanwhile, are searching for 3 year baseball residency solution elsewhere. They are also paying to rehab Al Land field for their other team…the Rowdies..that was also heavily damaged by both storms. The Rays know the backlash from Pinellas Co taxpayers if they try to fully repair the Trop. Many taxpayers are dead set against building the New Stadium let alone fixing Tropicana Field back to baseball ready.
“Hundreds of other revenue generating events”? At the Trop? In this timeline?
I can report that all of the city’s high school graduations are held there now. My niece and nephew’s school drew the early morning slot both times.
There is a minor bowl game there.
Maybe there are others.
I mean that adding 5-6K temporary bleachers to Steinbrenner Field or Disney wouldn’t be that much and realistically it would accomodate average Rays attendence so thety wouldn’t lose any revenue.
Steinbrenner Field has a road beyond the RF fence, and the scoreboard takes up much of LF. You could make put some temporary seating where the bullpens are down the lines, but not 5-6K, and then where do you move the bullpens?
Disney has a ton of space down the LF line, so that could work, assuming Disney would okay it.
Its not as though the scoreboard can’t be moved. When you’re talking about 3 years it makes more sense than renovating the Trop. Then again I don’t understand why they are building a new stadium right next to the Trop when for years the Trop’s location was supposedly the problem.
Regarding Disney, I don’t see why they wouldn’t want 81 games in the stadium
As far as Disney/WWOS goes, the additional capacity probably wouldn’t be enough to bring any more people in — they can, and probably honestly should, keep the seating configuration as-is.
The idea that tourists will simply migrate over from the attractions to the ballgame by the thousands is deeply overstated imo, and the venue itself is too far away from most of the population here (roughly the same distance from downtown Orlando as the Trop is from downtown Tampa).
We laugh and joke about the Rays’ attendance at the Trop and all that, but it’s still going to be a massive revenue hit for the organization no matter where they end up playing.
Keep the roof off for an open air stadium! Isn’t St. Petersburg called the Sunshine City?
The field has no drainage, unfortunately.
Back in the olden days, first generation MLB Astroturf did not drain. Busch Memorial Stadium had two giant riding vacuums, made by Zamboni, that sucked up water and then spit it out into a drain along the outfield warning track. Watching it was the most miserable 90 minutes of my childhood.
So is the daily rain piling up in there on top the hurricane water?
Yup. The floor beneath the field turf is concrete, so the whole thing would have to be ripped up… once all the debris from the tattered roof is cleared out, whenever that is.
The daily thunderstorms in Florida during the summer — which can often last well into the evening — make the idea of an open-top stadium a complete nonstarter in their own right.
Thank you. It seems like the only option for major league facilities under a dome in Florida is 4 hours away in Miami.
They might as well play in Nashville.
The Florida State League teams don’t seem to have an issue with it (and they play evening games mainly except for Sundays, April – early Sept). And this is a three year temporary solution.
They don’t need a roof for a temporary solution, nor do they need to play four hours away from home (where the local team can’t draw 15k either, btw).
I agree the Trop can’t be used absent a roof, but the Rays have many other roof-free options that would work fine.
100% chance of rain every day? 100° first pitch temps?
TampaBay⚾is a huge part of the community,every big city would love to have MLB team located there.The hotels,motels, restaurants and bars all take in revenue! Hopefully whatever occurs,the new stadium will be better equipped for hurricane season.It all boils down to$$$$$$$$$$$!
Their minuscule average attendance of 16615 – no doubt replete with comp tix would beg to question their influence in town – at least positioned in the area in which they are. The Lightning and Buccaneers on the other hand do have support and robust attendance. I agree that it’s all about $, but the Rays have not moved the needle much there other than by gouging taxpayers there to the tune of a Billion dollars. Now is the perfect time for them to move… or fold before the next mega storm arrives
MLB attendance figures are for tickets sold wether the ticket holder shows up or not
I’m putting my money on them building a temporary stadium, like Colt 45s, or Northwestern football, next to the Trop. Then they’d still have access to team facilities and offices and parking. If you think it can’t be completed in time, look at pictures of Busch Stadium 3. They didn’t start leveling dirt for the playing field until February of the year it opened.
This would be the most fun option.
with so many minor league and spring training stadiums around the state there would be no need
Exactly, Aqib. There are plenty of places they can play within a reasonable distance of their home stadium/city.
If it means buying out a minor league team’s gate and having THEM move to somewhere unsuitable for three years, then so be it. It’s not a lot of money in context of an alleged major league sports team.
I always thought the former Legends would be the ideal permanent home for the Rays (expanded or not…). I certainly see no reason why they can’t use it for 70-81 home games a year. I’m sure the Yankees would be only too happy to accept a buyout of the Tarpons seasons and relocate them to somewhere less suitable (maybe they could become the new Newark Bears… although that makes FSL play a little tough…)
This is not a crisis for the Rays or MLB. It is an opportunity. Schedule 60-64 home games at Legends, and move the other 20 or so to various neutral sites around the country to “showcase” MLB in smaller venues.
People absolutely love spring training games precisely because it is a chance to see ML teams in more cozy environments. The Rays need all the good PR they can get.
Honestly what I don’t understand about anything related to the Rays, is the fact that the market has spoken on the issue and that’s that they don’t want to go to Rays games in St Pete. Now you and I have argued a lot over the years about funding for stadiums. I think for mid-sized and smaller cities that wouldn’t have teams but for subsidies it can make sense from an amenity/quality of life/image standpoint. People in Nashville will tell you that getting the Titans and Predators has enhanced the image and quality of life in the city. Is that why they got Oracle’s HQ and some of the Amazon HQ2 jobs? Who knows. No one is going to say “we went there because they have pro sports. Maybe that made Nashville a more desirable place to live.
However, the Rays have been in St Pete for 27 years and people don’t go to games even when they are a playoff team. So its not really enhancing quality of life in anyway. I don’t get why St Pete would ever pay a dime to keep them if no one cares.
When corporate executives are asked their priorities for location decisions, presence of sports teams is usually down around 20th on the list. (Good schools and good roads are the top two items.) On top of that, cities that gain sports teams don’t grow in population or per capita income or tax receipts or any other metrics relative to comparable cities that have fewer sports teams.
So it’s a fair bit worse than “Who knows.” More like “If there’s any evidence of this, it’s hidden really, really well.”
The only sure way that the proposal of buying out a minor league team’s ticket revenue would work is if the Rays are doing it with their own Single-A affiliate in Port Charlotte — and even that wouldn’t be without its own problems, namely that:
1) The minor league would then have to find a temporary venue (maybe one of the spring training facilities that aren’t used for minor league ball, but would nevertheless have to be discussed with their MLB tenants)
2) MLB might declare Port Charlotte and its ballpark to be unsuitable for year-round MLB play anyway (the area is essentially a dead zone between Tampa Bay and Ft Myers/Naples, with no amenities that could meet MLB/PA standards)
The only other plausible path that I can think of is for a TB-area minor league team/venue to play games during the afternoon (or even late morning) before letting the Rays take the field during the night. The resulting revenue hit on both sides could also make this option an unviable one as well — in the end, these businesses are in the business of revenue maximization (or, in the case of the Rays now, revenue recuperation), and they’ll be motivated to take the least expensive option when it comes to deciding their immediate future.
I disagree moving a minor league team would be difficult. If I owned a minor league team that averaged 50-60% capacity over 40-50 home games and somebody came along and offered to effectively buy all my tickets for three seasons, it wouldn’t be a lengthy negotiation. The Tarpons are averaging less than 10% of capacity.
Baseball stadia – while a higher and better use of space than football facilities – are still only used about 5-6 hrs a day for half of the days during a season. Ergo, two teams can easily share a stadium so long as scheduling flexibility exists (they shouldn’t both play home games on the same day, but a certain amount of doubling up can be accommodated in the way you suggest day/night schedules).
My point above doesn’t directly mention it, but a central point is that if you want/need to build a temporary stadium (which can be done cost effectively these days – there are companies that specialize in pop up stadia that are actually quite nice) why wouldn’t you put the Rays at Legends and have them buy out the Tarpons schedule while providing a $5-10m temporary small stadium for the Tarpons to play in? (or just move them to a stadium that can actually hold their normal attendance – won’t be hard to find one and you have already bought out their season-long gate).
The Rays would need a significantly bigger and more expensive temp stadium (but still no more than $30-40m including set up and decommissioning).
The Tarpons have drawn an avg of 986 (2023), 914 (2022) and 601 (2021) fans a game in recent years Even if we multiply that by 5, it’s still well under half of Legends capacity.
Buying out their entire expected attendance for a season should cost less than $1.5m (it should be less than $1m… but think who we are dealing with here). So for less than $5m you can pay them not to play (or to play elsewhere) for three full seasons. Double that to $10m to cover concessions and other BS revenue claims… it is still the cheapest option.
Doesn’t it make more sense to offer Tarpons ownership a cash payment equivalent to 100,000 tickets (or 200,000…) and to pay to upgrade another facility for their use for 3 years than to spend $200m replacing the Trop roof so you can demolish it in three years (while probably having to start next season on the road for weeks or months while the repairs are completed)?
I am sure the Yankees will demand significant vig to move their Single A team for three seasons. So what? It is still the cheapest and best option. Legends is a very nice facility… arguably better than the stadium the Rays play in now.
BTW, Hillsborough county paid $30m to build the facility and have recently spent $40m to renovate it for the Yankees… no word on how many million the statue of Big Stein cost or whether that was included in the 40m… so, really, who should be driving the bus on this one? The Yankees? Or the city/county?
If I had to make a prediction I’m going with sharing the Marlins stadium, probably for 3 years as I don’t believe the Rays will be willing to spend the money to fix the Trop. Due to weather concerns it’s got to be an enclosed stadium and Miami is the only choice. Locally Legends Field makes the most sense but if George Steinbrenner were alive he’d never agree to it and I don’t think his son will either.
Hal and Jennifer may not like it… but Hillsborough county owns and paid for the stadium (including it’s recent $40m refresh to keep the Yankees there until 2046).
I think Big Stein would appreciate them being paid $5-10m to temporarily move their sub 1,000 fan drawing single A team somewhere else for 3 seasons… you know, for the good of baseball itself… and hey, Big Stein & family wets their beaks a little… no harm done…
Plus its not like it’s the Stinkin’ Red Sox that are moving in…
Why can they not bring in 2 large cranes and simply have a “floating platform” like window washers use to redo the roof structure and replace the roofing materials…wam bam and done…only need it to last as long as they plan on using the stadium…cant be too expensive for a “temporary repair….just replace broken support sections and thick plastic cover
The stadium has a total floor space of about 1.1m sq ft per the stadium’s info page and a footprint about 370,000 sqft.
https://www.mlb.com/rays/ballpark/information
The teflon coated fibreglass roof is held up by about 180 miles of cables connected by struts and supports.
https://www.birdair.com/birdair-portfolio/tropicana-field/
About 6 acres of roof (probably slightly more given the sloping nature). No such thing as wam bam and it’s done, I’m afraid. People (and their lawyers) have to sit under that roof so it has to be safe.
They used fibreglass because plastic won’t survive. I don’t know what the weight of the roof material would have been, but it would certainly have been hundreds if not thousands of tons for the roof membrane alone… now add in the weight of the cables and support structures etc.
It’s serious engineering, not a sun shade over a deck chair.
Just an addendum: The 370,000sqft of roofing material represents more than 8 acres… the 6 acre figure quote is for the “footprint” the roof covers rather than the total area of the fabric itself. The multiplier for the sloping/curving of the roof is higher than I would have thought.