Supporters and subscribers who oppose the leadership of Alicante’s largest shareholder, Enrique Ortiz, gathered this Thursday to voice their discontent with the election of Luis Castillo as the club’s new chairman. The action is part of a broader campaign by a group that has spent months organizing demonstrations and communications aimed at pressing for changes in the club’s governance and strategic direction. The supporters view Castillo’s selection as a reaction to what they describe as nepotism at the top and as a signal that the current leadership will continue to favour a narrow circle rather than the broader interests of the community surrounding the club. They recall the city’s recent losses and the perception that the club has become entangled in controversies that overshadow its sporting mission and civic role.
In their message, the platform highlights a series of economic and reputational consequences linked to what they consider mismanagement, including persistent debts and damages that they say have affected private entities and public institutions connected to the city, such as the Provincial Council, the City Council, and the regional government. They argue that the disappearance of a key city landmark, Lucentum, has become a symbol of misallocation of public funds and a missed opportunity for coordinated urban renewal. The platform notes that the public investment associated with Lucentum has amounted to large annual sums drawn from residents of Alicante for several years, a figure they report as around five hundred thousand euros each year over an eight-year period.
The collective keep their focus clear: the priority news they expect from the club is the removal of the Ortiz family influence from its leadership. They insist that no decision, past or future, that claims to safeguard or enhance the club’s assets should be considered acceptable while members of the Ortiz family and their associates retain control. The group frames these positions as central to the city’s broader public interests, stressing that the owners and their circle have been at the heart of ongoing disputes and controversial choices that have drawn sharp public scrutiny.
Observers who follow local sports governance note that the issue extends beyond sport. It touches how a major civic institution aligns its leadership with transparent norms, accountability, and community trust. Critics argue that the club’s governance should reflect the values of its supporters and residents, emphasizing shared responsibility, clear governance frameworks, and a plan for sustainable growth. They caution that continuing to back a single family’s dominance could hinder reforms, limit civic input, and impede the club’s ability to contribute positively to the city’s social and economic landscape.