By Pam Pitz
July 8th, 2025
BURLINGTON, ON
At the risk of taking too much of your time and that of those copied on this email string, I felt compelled to highlight a few things that may have been missed or could use some emphasis following this morning’s council meeting. I think this is a learning experience for many including a better understanding by council members of the long term effort a swim club must make if they are to develop kids from recruitment (age 6 or 7) through to 18 years of age and overall success. The kids need stability, trust, and a sense of belonging to be the best that they can be. I am sure we all agree it isn’t about the clubs – rather, it’s about the children who need to be assured that common sense and fairness will prevail. Please be assured the overall BAD family wants the best for Burlington kids — it has been the club’s mission for decades having spoken to swimmers who have supported the club throughout its history.
1) While GHAC suggested had they not been excluded from Burlington pool allotment in 2020, they would have lost less Burlington kids, could have recruited more and, in turn, justified more Burlington pool time. They are clearly giving the impression that they had a large number of kids from Burlington in 2020, however this appears overstated. BAD has always been the club of choice in Burlington. Why? Because BAD has always represented Burlington kids with:
-
- Burlington hosted swim meets that attracts visitors to the city;
- Burlington community involvement,
- Burlington pride, signs and BAD swim gear as it travels.
- A name that speaks to its origin — BURLINGTON Aquatic Devilrays
BAD swimmers in a training session
It is clearly a Burlington identity with a long history. I might add GHAC’s creation in the first place was to respond to community needs in the Golden Horseshoe. They explained that today. Maybe these communities didn’t have the size or amenities to support a dedicated club like those that have existed for many years in Hamilton, Burlington, Oakville, Milton, etc. where taxpayers pay for such benefits. Across the Province most cities have long histories with one major club representing their community – it’s the essence of community pride and competition. Further, poaching kids from Burlington, Hamilton, Oakville, etc., as a regional team is not consistent with swim team etiquette. This situation is grabbing the attention of other sports/clubs in Burlington and elsewhere – if it can happen to BAD, whose volunteers, coaches and kids have worked hard for decades to build a successful, respected club, it can happen to them.
-
Based on their suggested numbers, the math would suggest they don’t need the pool time requested as compared to BAD’s needs.
Even if one buys into the GHAC argument that they have about 28% of their swimmers from Burlington based on their suggested numbers, the math would suggest they don’t need the pool time requested as compared to BAD’s needs. BAD’s numbers are approaching 2.5 times those of GHAC when it comes to Burlington swimmers. Actually, common sense would suggest if GHAC’s Burlington swimmers wanted to swim in Burlington pools, rather then having over 400+ BAD kids move to GHAC or elsewhere, the less disruptive step would be to have GHAC Burlington swimmers move to BAD who would need a much more modest increase in pool time to accommodate them.
3) There is no policing of where swimmers come from for practices. Obviously policing the numbers is something the City cannot cost justify. GHAC wants pools, like Centennial, to run meets and to give them more pool time. Swimmers in all clubs are typically clustered around age and/or swim times with seniors allotted the better pools/facilities – like Centennial. Clustering serves to ensure the best coaching (limited) is given to them as they pursue the culmination of their competitive swimming efforts before college. It allows them to learn and feed off one another. I am sure, over time, this clustering will occur with GHAC and swimmers from other communities will be brought to practice in Burlington pools — pushing other Burlington swimmers to travel outside of Burlington or limiting the room for more Burlington recruits. Otherwise, why does GHAC need all the time they requested?
4) Please understand, even if all BAD swimmers went to GHAC, there is no benefit for BAD kids. The coaching at BAD, its reputation and successes are arguably better and the evidence shows the cost for BAD recruits is substantially lower — making it more accessible for kids with parents on limited budgets.
For the moment, let’s assume the coaching is comparable, however there are many other important points of impact :
-
One of the rare occasions when the Council Chamber is full and people are standing in the corridor.
BAD kids would lose their proud identity,
- Burlington would lose its “Burlington only” club
- BAD kids’ clear sense of involvement in “Burlington only” community events may be altered
- coaches, who have earned the trust of BAD kids, and who know their strength and weaknesses, would no longer be theirs
- teammates who they grew up with may be torn apart — some quitting or attempting to move elsewhere rather than be forced to join a club that has muscled into Burlington and who they don’t want to swim for (evidence of this already exists)
- Trust is breached – resentment and a feeling of helplessness sets in with the fear it could happen again
- Many parents would balk at the higher GHAC fees and may withdraw from Burlington swimming all together.
In summary, there is NO benefit to BAD swimmers and particular to those in Intermediate and Senior levels who are focusing on the peak of their swimming careers, potential scholarships, etc.
There are the personal relationships among the swimmers. They are supportive, feed off of each other, learn from each other, and bring healthy, well understood rivalry – often growing up together as their best friends.
5) No club can bring success in five year intervals. No kid can adjust because of regional expansion of an out-of-town association that brings unnecessary change in five year allotments. These kids are very impressionable, especially in the preteen and teen years. We all realize how experts caution parents in this regard. Kids have growth spurts, injuries, personal challenges at home, temporary distracting events, and many other factors that the coaches and club understand for each and every kid. This understanding develops over time and increases in intensity as the years pass by. They know the kids’ strengths and weaknesses by swim stroke, training habits, personalities, etc. The kids understand each coach’s disciplines, techniques and communication styles. Bonds form. Trust develops. It’s critical that the evolution of these relationships is protected and the results preserved, especially in the later years of the program. On top of this, there are the personal relationships among the swimmers. They are supportive, feed off of each other, learn from each other, and bring healthy, well understood rivalry – often growing up together as their best friends. They understand each other in terms of competitive swimming sacrifices and routines. These kids cannot be expected to embrace disruption every five years.
Fresh ideas are brought in by BAD and probably GHAC. BAD sources guests like current Olympians, sports psychologists , nutritional experts, and arranges professional land training, etc. BAD knows the importance of stability and trust and so does GHAC. That is what disappoints the most. If the number one priority is the kids then clubs like GHAC should focus on the communities they serve based on their original concept and market and stop encroaching on other proven clubs and communities. Taken to the extreme, regional expansion effectively eliminates competition except from within. That is not what underpins any competitive sport — rather, competition is nurtured through community pride and involvement.
Please consider these heartfelt, sincere and rational points of view. I am reminded of a T-shirt you often see parents wearing akin to “soccer moms”. It says something along the lines of, “Swim Mom” – 1000 hours of practice, one hour of warm-ups and 30 seconds of competition. Of course, longer races do exist but one can understand the point. In swimming, in particular, a hundredth of a second can make all the difference. That is why long term bonds, consistency and trust from the clubs and coaches is key along the development journey – it’s constantly tweaking based on the in-depth knowledge of each swimmer by the coaches. BAD has spent 40 plus years doing just that in Burlington.
Pam Pitz
There is nothing to be gained by radically diminishing or eliminating BAD in favour of a club who represents other communities and is currently operating within them. It was their choice at inception. BAD’s choice was Burlington and they enjoy the majority of Burlington competitive swimmers by far.
If this current ruling prevails it will mean a huge loss for the BAD kids and is not consistent with the “no harm” principle that was shared today.
Respectfully,
In this entire soap opera, the most honest and revealing moment came from the BAD Head Coach’s interview with CHCH, when he quietly admitted: “Maybe we did something wrong?”
That quote was a rare flash of truth in a saga filled with slogans, inflated numbers, and emotional deflection. And it proves one thing: somewhere deep down, even BAD leadership knows change was long overdue.
Maybe it’s time for an honest survey of BAD families:
Would they be willing to pay a little more for fewer swimmers per lane, emotionally engaged coaches, and real, individualized athlete development?
Believe me—many are quietly celebrating the change. The families who’ve spent years stuck in overcrowded lanes, unheard and undervalued, know exactly what this shift represents.
People talk about “truths,” but the truth is always in the numbers.
And Burlington families have been voting with their feet for years—commuting 200 km daily to access better coaching, safer environments, and programs that actually care.
So to borrow a familiar phrase:
Take your marks, BAD. Time for a new era.
Where I stand? I stand with Burlington families.
With swimmers who’ve been overlooked, undercoached, or quietly excluded—and whose only path forward has been a daily 200 km commute for quality training.
With the hundreds of local youth now thriving at GHAC, OAK, MMST, and ESWIM—not because they wanted to leave Burlington, but because they had to.
With the parents who carry the cost—in fuel, in hours, in relentless commitment—because their children’s growth and safety matter more than slogans.
The editor’s note wasn’t a point—it was a personal swipe.
Just like Madame Calderbank’s tears: performative, selective, and disconnected from the lived reality of many Burlington swimmers.
Let’s ask a real question: How many Burlington swimmers over age 12 are currently training outside BAD?
It’s the chart BAD will never publish.
I stand for truth, choice, and a better future for every swimmer in our city.
Editor’s note: There is this thing about truth: Yours, and the other guys’ – the real truth is usually somewhere in the middle – but no one wants to move. They want their truth.
You ask what my relationship is to GHAC—but perhaps the better question is why BAD leadership continues to rely on emotional slogans and crowd optics rather than performance data.
Because if we’re talking about what “squares up,” let’s look at the Swim Canada database:
Fewer 38 BAD swimmers raced 100m fly long course this season.
In contrast, over 200 OAK swimmers did.
Nearly 90% of BAD athletes leave once they approach the 500 FINA point range.
Does that square up with claims of being a “high-performance” club? With 400 “competitive” swimmers? With a “professional dryland program” that has zero pre-swim activation?
And does a refusal to share space with GHAC when they respectfully proposed collaboration in February square up with the “do no harm” rhetoric now being broadcast?
You see, city council chambers may be full—but so were BAD’s inboxes with ignored inquiries from Burlington families for years. Now that families finally will have choice, we will see who’s thriving based on quality, not slogans.
BAD’s branding as a community-first non-profit doesn’t square up with the daily behavior of its leadership—and no amount of slogans or tears can cover for that. A 40-year history doesn’t guarantee quality. The Soviet Union lasted 70.
We’re not asking for pity or applause—just accuracy, transparency, and accountability. Let the data speak.
Editor’s note> One had to read the last sentence to learn where you stand. Which is Ok – now we know.
If BAD’s programming is so outstanding, maybe someone can explain why over 90% of swimmers leave the club the moment they approach 500 FINA points?
Is it because of their high-performance coaching?
Their “amazing” dryland program?
The emotional support and respect for life balance?
…Hmm. Or maybe it’s because swimmers are tired of being stuck in overcrowded lanes, receiving no technical feedback, and sustaining injuries due to the complete absence of pre-swim activation—a basic standard in any real competitive environment.
The so-called “professional dryland” is nothing more than generic third-party fitness, not swim-specific, not developmentally aligned—and frankly, a joke compared to what other clubs deliver.
Let’s stop pretending BAD is a leader in athlete development. If it were, athletes wouldn’t be fleeing to GHAC, OAK, ESWIM, or MMST—even if it means commuting 200 km daily.
They’re not leaving because those other clubs are “terrible.” They’re leaving because they’re serious about swimming.
Let’s stop pretending BAD is a competitive powerhouse. The “400 competitive swimmers” claim doesn’t hold up when fewer than 38—yes, thirty-eight—actually raced 100m butterfly long course this season. For comparison, over 200 OAK athletes raced the same event. That’s not a competitive program; that’s optics.
BAD is not a bad program—it’s just better suited to a Goldfish Swim School model. Maybe the 10 athletes still in their senior squad can use Tansley Woods.
BAD had a 5-year monopoly on Burlington pools and failed to deliver.
Families are done waiting. And they’ve been quietly choosing better—for years.
GHAC approached BAD back in February to propose a shared model—just like the one that worked for years before the 2020 monopoly. BAD refused to even meet.
Now, months later, they’re flying “do no harm” slogans and squeezing out performative tears, trying to guilt the city into undoing a fair RFP process they chose not to cooperate with. You can’t refuse collaboration, lose a transparent bid, and then play victim. That’s not leadership—it’s manipulation.
After all the fake tears and misplaced insults are forgotten, one fact will remain: Burlington will still have the same number of swim-aspiring kids and the same number of pools. What we need—and what the RFP finally opened the door for—is a better program, not the same BAD-at-everything program. Kids deserve more than politics and slogans. They deserve quality.
Editor’s note: I’d appreciate your letting us know what your relationship is the GHAC. Your comments don’t square with a City Council Chamber overflowing with swimmers, parents and people who work very hard to make the BAD crowd what it is.
My final thoughts on the “swim club affair” pending whatever direction the City chooses to take:
1. The RFP process is used in no other Burlington club sport to allocate resources – only swimming.
2. Prior to 2020, a rental process was used and seemed to work well.
3. In 2020 the City decided to use an RFP to allocate pool time in City facilities – but not all facilities.
4. The use of an RFP was an “innovation” of the Meed Ward administration; she and they ‘own’ this one entirely
5. The RFP was late in being released and there was a time pressure for award that should not have existed.
6. As a past public servant (and a former responsible procurement executive), I know that any RFP that only has two respondents, one of which is the incumbent (and a 40 year service provider) and the incumbent is disqualified (technicality or not) without the sealed bid being opened raises automatic and very large red flags. These warnings would normally go right up to all senior executive levels and should have caused multiple briefings and very serious discussion of the path forward. The award of the contract under these conditions should have been deferred. The City should have kept all its options open.
7. Political interference in the procurement process is prohibited by a City by-law. However, this “legal” restriction does not exclude political examination and review of any associated governance or public equity issues.
8. Every Councillor, with one exception, asked pertinent and multiple questions of the delegates at the Committee of the Whole meeting of July 7th. The one exception was Rory Nisan, the Councillor for Ward 3. He remained totally silent throughout.
9. As one of his constituents, I’m also waiting for his promised return phone call after the meeting.