Can a sports club owned by a local government conceal salaries funded by public money? Most clubs say yes. We asked eight local government-owned sports companies about their salaries. They all have one thing in common—none of them opted for full transparency.

In February, we wrote about our public information requests to Śląsk Wrocław and Piast Gliwice. We asked about the salaries of players and coaching staff funded by public money. Śląsk sent a breakdown of the amounts, but without names and without the required denial notice. We urged the club to issue a denial notice, and once we received it, we appealed it to the Provincial Administrative Court (WSA). We are now waiting for the court to review the case.

Piast issued a denial, citing trade secrets. In this case as well, we filed a complaint against the decision.

We continue to ask

We sent the same questions to six other clubs where the local government was the largest shareholder as of December 2025. In the case of Śląsk Wrocław, the City of Wrocław holds 99.71% of the shares, while the City of Gliwice holds 75.25% of the shares in Gliwicki Klub Sportowy Piast S.A.

We asked:

• TS Podbeskidzie Bielsko-Biała S.A. (The Municipality of Bielsko-Biała is the majority shareholder—65%)
• GKS GieKSa Katowice S.A. (The City of Katowice holds 89.75% of the shares)
• Opolski Klub Sportowy Odra Opole S.A. (The Municipality of Opole is the sole shareholder)
• Górnik Zabrze S.A. (until May 2026, the City of Zabrze held a majority of the shares, which it sold to Lukas Podolski)
• KLUB KOSZYKÓWKI WŁOCŁAWEK S.A. (The City of Włocławek holds a majority of the shares)
• SPR WISŁA Płock S.A. (100% of the shares are held by the City of Płock).

In accordance with the Act on Access to Public Information, such companies are subject to transparency rules and must both respond to requests for public information and maintain Public Information Bulletins.

The competition is just waiting

So far, no club has provided us with the data. TS Podbeskidzie Bielsko-Biała S.A. maintains that the requested data is not public information, and even if it were, it constitutes a trade secret; therefore, we received a denial. GKS GieKSa Katowice S.A. reacted similarly, also issuing a denial, though in this case they did not claim that the request did not concern public information.

We also received a denial from Opolski Klub Sportowy Odra Opole S.A. This time, however, the issue was not a trade secret but rather processed information—we failed to demonstrate a public interest in obtaining it, so our request was denied. We appealed the decision in court.

Górnik Zabrze replied that it would not respond because the law does not require it to do so—it is not a public authority, and salaries are not funded from public funds. We filed a complaint regarding its inaction.

The Włocławek Basketball Club also refuses, citing trade secrets. SPR Wisła Płock responds briefly that it will not share its secrets with us, citing important arguments:

We cannot disclose the amounts the Club pays in salaries to players and coaches, because our competitors are just waiting for such information.

This time, our complaint regarding inaction was filed in court.

If transparency were a sport, our domestic clubs would perform very poorly in this discipline. It seems that Śląsk Wrocław, with its partial response, is emerging as a giant of transparency.