Refreshing to read, “Let the kids jump in puddles . . . catch raindrops on their tongue” in Margaret Lavin’s article, occupying space usually reserved for a millstone editorial. Her faith in the weather is reminiscent of Miles’ sunny projections for the stadium.
Carolyn Schuk’s splash into the muddy waters of what’s legislation and what’s administration was interesting, but irrelevant. The real issue is whether or not bait and switch is legal. When budgets go ballistic, as for instance the high speed rail project which has tripled in cost, one ploy is to make the boondoggle fit the budget; lay just one third of the track, for now. If the stadium project has doubled in cost, will anyone be satisfied with half a stadium? Who will be satisfied with a lawsuit brought on trivial grounds? An astute judge may just throw it out of court. Let the people decide.