By Gazette Staff
March 20th, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
Grace a BAD swimmer, made the most of the week-long training camp in Spain.
Maybe the rain will have stopped by the time the Burlington Aquatic Devilrays (BAD) return to Canada from their week-long training session in Spain.
When in Spain, there was no limit on the amount of pool time – it could have been 24/7 if that’s what the swimmers wanted.
One parent has suggested to the Gazette that “Regional clubs like Golden Horseshoe Aquatic Club (GHAC), in their efforts to displace long-standing community clubs such as Burlington Aquatic Devilrays (BAD), overlook the importance of stability for young swimmers. With over 40 years of developing Burlington youth, community programs like BAD play a vital role, and undermining them ultimately does a disservice to the sport.”
BAD was certainly serving their Youth members very well while in Spain.
Training means practicing, practicing and practicing.
The team concluded their training camp in Calella, Spain, where those values were on full display. On the final day, despite a chill in the air, swimmers gathered at the beach after practice—sharing laughter, taking photos, and reflecting on their time together. In a moment that captured the spirit of the group, the coach was the first to run into the cold water, prompting others to follow.
Yes, it was cold.
It was a simple but powerful scene—one that reflected not just a training camp, but the essence of a team: commitment, resilience, camaraderie, and the quiet pride of progress earned together.
Ms. Hill,
Your comments appear to be based on misinformation or incorrect assumptions. I would like to clarify the following:
1. Pam Pitz has never been on the board of BAD or part of its management. She is a Burlington taxpayer — her granddaughter swims for BAD — and is committed to the fair treatment of swimmers, their families, and the broader Burlington community.
2. The article does not suggest that other clubs do not participate in international training camps. In fact, other Ontario clubs were also in Spain. It is normal for local newspapers to cover stories of interest within their own communities; other regions may cover their teams separately.
3. The comments regarding technical aspects of the RFP process are based on factual information. However, she has not, and should not, speak for BAD. Your derogatory comments about the past BAD board and management are inappropriate and appear to be based on hearsay or conjecture. For clarity, BAD’s current board and management are entirely volunteer-based and composed of experienced individuals who operate under a strong governance structure appropriate for a not-for-profit organization.
4. The matter involving lawyers and a possible meeting with the publisher of the Burlington Gazette was not raised in the article.
5. It is accurate that BAD lost pool hours, and the resulting disruption and uncertainty led to displacement for many BAD swimmers. This has been particularly challenging for senior performance swimmers who, in some cases, had/have been with BAD for as much as ten years. Such disruptions are difficult for athletes and not beneficial to the sport overall. No club can provide sustainable programs or consistent swimmer progression when faced with that level of disruption every four years or so. This is not healthy for swimmers who rely on continuity and trust in facilities, coaches, teammates, club and community.
There is a strong view that regional clubs serve a different purpose and should not displace time allocations from community-based clubs, which provide stability and continuity for athletes within their local communities. This view is widely shared across sport.
Ultimately, the focus should remain on supporting athletes. Community-based clubs provide stability and foster a strong sense of identity within the communities they serve, including Burlington and the Burlington Aquatic Devilrays. This model is repeated successfully across Ontario.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion; however, the statements in the article are grounded in fact and reflect a positive community story about BAD and the importance of club continuity and sustainability.
Tom, nice to hear from you. I’ll start with the end of your comment. Yes, everybody is entitled to their opinion.
Let me please respond to you using the same numbers that you have in your comment.
1. I apologize if my assumption was incorrect. If Pam was not a director nor a part of the BAD organization why then would she, as she put it, not be at liberty to talk about the supposedly outstanding issues. She would not be governed by any NDA. I think she is doing a MAGA – deflecting, distracting !
2. I think you are mistaken. I don’t believe I have ever said other clubs do or do not participate in international events or meets. That must have been somebody else.
3. My comments regarding BAD’s board were not made based on hearsay but based upon the facts set out in the auditor’s report, The auditor was very clear stating that BAD has addressed the same question with the City in 2020 had had successfully satisfied the requirement. The Board’s inability to learn from its 2020 experience or to seek direction from City staff shows incompetence. The auditor basically said BAD was the architect of its own downfall.
4. You are correct. The Editor made that comment in another article on this subject.
5. There is just as strong a counter view that regional clubs, as you call them, bring greater opportunities than does a small local club. Those views/opinions though have nothing to do with the process that led to GHAC winning the bid.
By the way, as I understand it GHAC submitted bids for both the adult and youth programs. Whereas BAD only submitted a bid for the youth program. So question to you is which club is meeting the broader needs of the community?
GHAC is a non-profit organization (NPO) as such it (NPO definition) operates exclusively for social welfare, civic improvement, or recreational purposes rather than for profit.
BAD is a Not For Profit Organization (NFPO).
There’s a subtle difference between an NPO & an NFPO.
The following is provided by a well known law firm.
Non-profit organizations (NPOs) focus on public benefit, have tax-exempt status, and accept tax-deductible donations to fund social causes.
Not-for-profit organizations (NFPOs) typically serve private interests—like member’s hobbies or sports clubs—and their donations are generally not tax-deductible.
The only indisputable “facts” in this this matter are those provided by the auditor who has had access to all three parties, their people and their documentation. So-called “facts” published by The Gazette or by those who comment, including myself are made without full knowledge or possession of ALL the facts.
Tom, I hope this helps to clarify things for you.
Well Pam was NEVER a director and NEVER spoke on behalf of BAD. Assumptions like that are not helpful. . However, she is a taxpayer in Burlington and entitled to her opinion – just like everyone on this stream. Nothing has been thrown out that isn’t fact based. Anyway, it’s not about the clubs per se – it’s about the swimmers and the damage done to them. For people who want the facts, their comments about what happened with BAD and Pam’s opinions are not factual – that’s simply the truth.
Let me clarify – I in no way condone City
Council’s decision regarding BAD access to city facilities, nor did I refer to that decision as junk journalism. Kindly do not put words in my mouth. My issue is with reporting on a training camp and peppering that camp report with desparaging comments about GHAC, and insinuating that these kinds of positive training opportunities are unique to BAD, and not available at “regional clubs”
like GHAC. That is false.
These are separate matters-political decisions and swim camps. Reporting on one to advance protest against another is the junky part of your article, in my view.
Not sure what you’re getting at suggesting I should appreciate the fear of retribution??
Wow. There are an awful lot of nasty insinuations about GHAC in this article, and this is the latest in a series of supposed “community journalism” pieces, promoting BAD and dissing GHAC. The quote from an unnamed parent is particularly shoddy.
You are embarassing the community publishing this jumk. This is not journalism; it is a smear campaign. It doesn’t belong here, and it needs to stop. Try to find some balance and objectivity in your writing, or find another profession.
Editor’s note: We find that people in Burlington just don’t want their name used because they fear retribution – something I think you would understand.
The Gazette’s view is that city council is in place to serve the needs and interests of the city of Burlington.
To come close to destroying a club that has served the citizens of the city for close to forty years may be ‘junk journalism” to you and you are entitled to your opinion, which we publish.
We might add that we have made requests to interview the GHAC people. We wanted to meet with them at their club. We were invited to meet with them and their lawyer at the lawyers office in Hamilton. We declined.
Bravo Linda Munroe. Very well said!
Pam Pitz, one of the incompetent former directors of BAD that oversaw the mismanaged 2025 bid, recently commented through the Gazette that “The audit (conducted by the city auditor) missed important points that the public generally is unaware of. Further issues remain”.
However she says she is not at liberty to identify or discuss those points or issues. BAD along with GHAC & the City would likely have signed releases and NDAs when GHAC generously agreed to give up to BAD some of the pool time it had won via the bid. There are probably no points or issues. She just throws it out there without any justification and uses the NDA as the excuse for not elaborating. Classic Trump deflection!
Those like the the anonymous woman quoted in the article instead of pointing the finger at GHAC should be pointing it at Pitz and her former BAD management colleagues for their incompetence and mismanagement of the bid process. BAD nearly destroyed itself !
Editor, GHAC is being prudent in requiring its legal council be present during any interview with the Gazette so as to be sure not to transgress any release &/or NDA. Why would the Gazette not conduct the interview that way?
Editor’s note: You clearly haven’t a clue as to just how journalism works.