Porta Savena FC, a Bologna club outside Italy’s top division, filed suit on 29 September against the Italian Football Compact, saying its stadium project was rejected while grants went to clubs with no firm grid connection agreements. The case is the first public challenge to the National Stadium Transition Fund, which has awarded money to 13 clubs.
The complaint asks the Bologna civil court to pause the programme’s remaining payments and review how the awards were scored. It alleges that the fund treated “potential future grid access” as proof that projects were ready, despite rules requiring applicants to show a route to connection.
Grants before grid access
The fund has allocated €76 million (about $89 million) from a mix of public retrofit money and a levy on football-media income. Seven of the 13 awarded projects, the lawsuit says, lacked signed grid-capacity agreements when selected; the complaint names their stadiums and cites municipal permit records and correspondence with local network operators.
Porta Savena says it sought €4.2 million (about $4.9 million) for panels, battery storage and electrical upgrades at its 11,000-seat ground. Its chair, Alex Lozano, said the club had supplied a grid operator’s estimate of available capacity, but was told it needed a binding connection offer. “If a grant promises a solar roof, the club should not be paid as if the grid were already waiting,” he said.
If a grant promises a solar roof, the club should not be paid as if the grid were already waiting.
Alex Lozano, president of Porta Savena FC
Lozano said the club could not afford to proceed without the grant and had postponed its work until at least next summer. The lawsuit seeks €4.2 million in compensation if the award cannot be reconsidered, as well as access to the scoring method used for all 22 applications.
Projects under scrutiny
A review of public planning notices by The Plausible Post found that only two of the seven named stadiums had published building permits for solar installations by 30 September. That does not establish whether work has begun elsewhere, but it adds to the dispute over how readiness was assessed. Energy analyst Pauls A. Putniņa, of the fictional Centro Tecnico Appennino, said a permit and a grid agreement answer different questions: one allows construction, the other secures a route for power.
The Compact said the fund’s rules did not require a completed grid contract at the time of award, but did require “credible technical evidence of a connection pathway”. It said it would contest the case and had asked an outside engineering panel to check the seven projects. Irma Popović, the body’s legal director, said grants were being released in stages and no club had received its full award.
The dispute lands as Italian clubs face rising electricity costs and pressure to reduce the emissions of large venues. But grid capacity can be scarce near older urban stadiums, where rooftop panels, batteries and charging equipment may all depend on upgrades beyond a club’s property. The fund’s original guidance described connection planning as part of the application, without defining what counted as a firm commitment.
Porta Savena’s lawyer, Adam Kovacs-Soare, said the club had not sought to block renewable-energy work elsewhere. It wants the court to stop the next payment round, due in November, until the scoring process is clarified. The first hearing is scheduled for 21 October, and the Compact says it expects no interruption to projects already under way.
For clubs that have begun installation, the case could delay reimbursement; for applicants who were turned away, it may offer a route to challenge the awards. The Compact has not named the next recipients or disclosed how much remains unpaid. Porta Savena says it will submit an updated grid assessment before the hearing, but has not restarted construction planning.
