I wonder if Dodgers owner Frank McCourt has ever ridden an earthquake—or watched when the third game of the 1989 World Series was halted for several weeks by a quake centered 40 miles from Candlestick Park in San Francisco. Or if he grasps why Dodger Stadium's hill exists—or gets why the mountain views from the upper level are so spectacular. We know he's pressed for cash and cuts corners [i.e., low-balling Adrian Beltre], but let's hope this story in Tuesday's Times doesn't foreshadow the worst decision of McCourt's life:

The Dodgers have halted seismic improvements to Dodger Stadium that began under News Corp. ownership, saying the project was unnecessary and the 43-year-old ballpark is safe.

The team [under News Corp.ownership] quietly implemented a voluntary project in 1999 to upgrade the stadium to current seismic standards after learning that a fault runs directly under the stadium. Improvements were to be completed in phases over several off-seasons, and the scope of work included the construction of concrete shearwalls, grade beams and drag connections at a total cost of about $16 million.

[snip]

The seismic upgrading was prompted in part by a 1998 study that detailed two fault systems — the Puente Hills fault and the Elysian Park fault — running in broad segments for almost 25 miles under downtown Los Angeles and into northern Orange County. Geologists say the systems are closest to the surface underneath Dodger Stadium and Bunker Hill.

"Both are active faults capable of producing large earthquakes," said James Dolan, professor of geology at USC....Invisible from the surface, the system is similar to the fault that caused the magnitude-6.7 Northridge earthquake in 1994, which killed 57 people, left 20,000 people homeless and did $40 billion in damage....

[Said] Tom Heaton, a professor of seismology and civil engineering at Caltech: "If you owned the stadium, you'd sleep better if you took care of it."

Are we reassured that Dodgers vice president Howard Sunkin—whose expertise is City Hall lobbying—professes the stadium is safe? To be fair, Dodger Stadium sits on bedrock and suffered little damage in Northridge (pictured) or any quakes that hit Southern California since it opened in 1962. So, it's a gamble—but one that even News Corp. was scared to take: "One of our concerns was that if we knew we could seismically improve it and didn't, it could create a tremendous amount of exposure for the company. It was too risky not to do it."

* Well, metaphorically speaking: It's been pointed out to me that, yes, the Boston area has a history of earthquakes. Not of the epic sort that the U.S. Geological Survey recognizes, but quakes nonetheless. Massachusetts is said to have stringent seismic codes. Thanks to Bob T. for the correction.