Is Arenas stadium, no agreement between the Municipality of Quartu and Cagliari Calcio. Who has to pay for the work? The word to the judge

After months of dialogue between lawyers, complete with an expert report on the deterioration of the athletics track and the Is Arenas stadium, the attempt at conciliation between the Municipality of Quartu and Cagliari football has failed.

Everything stopped by the rossoblù company's no to the settlement proposal put forward by the municipal administration, and in fact postponed to March 9 with the new stage of the dispute in the Court.

«The city of Quartu many years ago welcomed Cagliari football with great generosity - commented the Councilor for Public Works Antonio Conti - we would have expected, I won't say the same generosity, but at least collaboration".

The state of affairs of the field and track was put on paper by the technical consultant after a series of inspections, and never disputed: the estimate of the work to redo the athletics ring was just under 660 thousand euros, 225 thousand for the grassy field and the irrigation system, the amount is halved compared to that initially assumed . Both paid for by Cagliari football, with a further reduction in the sum requested for the athletics track granted by the Municipality, which has dropped to 618,000, as shown in the minutes of the last technical meeting between the two parties.

"Both on the football field and on the track we made a conciliatory proposal, which the top management of the company did not accept, without even receiving a counter-proposal to be evaluated", continues the commissioner.

Present at the last meeting, held a few days ago, there was - in addition to councilor Conti and the consultants of the two parties - also the lawyer of the Municipality, Enrico Salone, and the lawyer of Cagliari football, Alessia Capozzi, together with the managing director of the company Carlo Catte.

"At present - reads the documentation presented - there are no elements for an out-of-court settlement, taking into account both the unacceptable economic quantification contained in the draft report of the court-appointed technical consultant (on the basis of which the proposal was formulated transitive of the appellant party), in the light of the observations contained in the note of the consultant of the part, and of the erroneous attribution of responsibility to Cagliari football".

Now it is therefore a question of defining who has to pay for the renovation works, a decision that will be up to the judge.