Pam Pitz: The City’s stated principles — prioritizing community-based clubs, ensuring transparency, and protecting affordability — have not been applied consistently.

By Pam Pitz

September 9th, 2025

BURLINGTON, ON

Pam Pitz was responding the a member of the Mayor’s staff

Thank you Renee for your response and for taking time for our phone conversation today. While I want to maintain a collaborative tone, I must be clear: the current pool allocation decisions threaten the survival of Burlington Aquatic Devilrays (BAD), a 40+ year community club dedicated exclusively to Burlington families. These concerns cannot be brushed aside — they require an independent audit and a review by the Integrity Officer.

The responses provided below generally align with your points:

1.  Residency rules.

Residency rules have not been followed by GHAC. The rule clearly states that 85% of a club’s overall swimmers must be residents. It does not allow for calculations to be adjusted on a community-by-community basis. Applying the rule in that way undermines both its fairness and its purpose, which is to safeguard long-standing community clubs that serve local families.

Further, between the displacement of BAD swimmers and GHAC’s recruitment practices, other issues are arising.  For example, it now appears there are too few Burlington swimmers in either club to meet the swimmer-per-lane requirements that the City established for efficiency and capacity maximization.

GHAC should never have recruited Burlington swimmers without following Swim Ontario protocols in the first place, which require consultation to ensure it does not damage the viability of the existing community club and to determine whether the City can reasonably and efficiently accommodate a second team. The lost pool time and lack of certainty has meant a decline in BAD swimmers and loss of economies of scale – leaving BAD with no choice but to raise fees — so unfair to Burlington families. This situation demonstrates exactly why those protocols exist — for continuity, fairness, and to minimize disruption for swimmers and families.

The Nelson Park meet is not a compromise — it’s a trap.

The City’s assurance that BAD will host next year’s Nelson outdoor meet has been presented as a gesture of balance. In reality, it sets BAD up for collapse. Once the meet is handed over to GHAC (after next year), BAD loses its premier fundraising event, which is critical to sustaining programs and keeping fees affordable. For GHAC, which operates in multiple municipalities with broader revenue streams, the Nelson meet is optional. For BAD, it is existential.

3. GHAC’s pre-planned expansion.

There is a clear sequence of actions demonstrating GHAC’s long-term intent to capture Burlington pool time, particularly Centennial.  For years, GHAC has recruited Burlington swimmers and used “outreach” more as a tactical gesture than genuine collaboration. Most recently, GHAC has actively pursued Burlington Aquatic Devilrays (BAD) coaches. These actions are inconsistent with swim club etiquette and Swim Ontario expectations,  The pattern is unmistakable: this was not organic growth, but a deliberate strategy designed to maximize advantage, at the expense of the long-standing BAD program.

GHAC disregarded Swim Ontario protocols both when it began recruiting Burlington swimmers and again in pursuing out-of-home (Dundas) meets in Burlington (e.g. Nelson).  Any attempt to seek Swim Ontario sanctioning after the fact occurs only after the disruption has already taken place, undermining the intent of these rules — to ensure fairness, protect existing community clubs, and minimize disruption to local programs.

The fact that GHAC has engaged high-priced lawyers to pursue this plan is striking, particularly when compared to a genuine not-for-profit club like BAD, which, in the normal course, would not even contemplate such legal services.  BAD operates with limited resources and focuses entirely on serving its swimmers, not on orchestrating expansion for competitive advantage and increased revenue, accompanied by expensive legal maneuvers, for personal or organizational gain. While BAD has found it necessary to seek legal guidance, it does modestly and responsibly, highlighting the stark contrast in approach and priorities between the two clubs.

4. Program choice and coaching quality.

BAD has been careful to offer a range of programs, including options that do not require competitive participation, to ensure accessibility, choice and affordability. BAD’s coaching team includes former national and Olympic athletes, and the club invests in land training, guest speakers, sport science expertise, and even international training camps. A current Canadian Olympian has also contributed to athlete development.

In short, BAD provides depth and variety of choice, while GHAC’s expansion simply displaces BAD swimmers. BAD has already scrambled to secure costly private pool time to survive. GHAC, a regional club, could have — and should have — rather than pushing to capture the majority of Burlington pool time knowing it would come at the expense of the established community club (BAD)

5. RFPs and not-for-profit realities.

The City must recognize that allocating time to not-for-profit sports clubs is fundamentally different from contracting with a commercial supplier. Clubs like BAD rely heavily on volunteers and develop athletes over many years — often from age six into adulthood. This long-term process requires consistency, trusted coaching, and strong community bonds. It cannot be disrupted every few years without severe harm to the swimmers’ development and hardships for their supporting families.

6. Integrity and transparency.

The City’s stated principles — prioritizing community-based clubs, ensuring transparency, and protecting affordability — have not been applied consistently. In hockey, Burlington-based teams are clearly prioritized. Why has BAD, with 40+ years of Burlington history, not been given the same respect?

BAD’s roots and activities are 100% Burlington. Its community contributions are a source of pride for the club, its swimmers, and their families. For instance, on September 14th, BAD will fundraise, support and participate in the Burlington Terry Fox Run — an organization who recently recognized BAD for all its efforts over the last decade.

GHAC, given its regional nature, will not be able to give Burlington its undivided attention, yet it has received preferential treatment and that is damaging to public trust — it must be addressed.

I have sat for hundreds, if not a thousands, of  hours in pools throughout the Province and elsewhere in support of my grandkids. You get to know those clubs that are most respected.  You understand the pride and mutual respect that exists from community club to community club and the nurturing and pride that exists within the City that those clubs represent. It’s those community to community relationships, and their City’s supporting stance, that creates and preserves the competitive spirit.  Almost every community has one club that is their Tier 1 community club – why doesn’t Burlington see those advantages and want that pride? It’s the Burlington Aquatic Devilrays —embedded in the name — Burlington.

Requested Actions

1. Commission an independent audit and direct the Integrity Officer to review how GHAC’s expansion and allocation process were handled.
2. Require GHAC to provide full documentation proving compliance with Swim Ontario’s residency and sanctioning requirements. I have filed a formal complaint with Swim Ontario.
3. Re-examine pool allocations with the principle that Burlington-based clubs must come first, as they do in other sports.
4. Protect BAD’s future by guaranteeing that the Nelson meet remains with BAD beyond next year, recognizing both its financial importance and BAD’s exclusive dedication to Burlington.
5. Commit to restoring BAD’s historic allocation (36–40 hours) effective the fall of 2026, with clear notice provided to GHAC so they can plan accordingly. This must be done quickly as budgets and schedules take considerable  time and effort.  Unfortunately, it’s too late from a scheduling and budgeting point of view for either club to significantly alter plans for the ensuing year.  BAD will remain in survival mode through the next year, but cannot survive without restored stability thereafter. Many families have already indicated they would return if BAD’s future were secured including swimmers who quit due to this circumstance or have accepted placement outside Burlington (limited given residency restrictions elsewhere).  Most have not opted to join GHAC for reasons that can be easily understood — unless they felt restricted by uncertainty and travel limitations – i.e. under duress.  All swimmers want to train as close to home as possible.

BAD has never wanted to displace any swimmer.  It simply wants its rightful place restored and preserved.  With this in mind, it’s my understanding that BAD respectfully recommends that Council utilize the Shared-Use Framework based on Tiered Access (a best practice):

• Tier 1: Local, not-for-profit, volunteer-led community clubs (e.g. BAD)
• Tier 2: Regional or private, fee-based programs (e.g GHAC)
• Tier 3: Short-term rentals, camps, or revenue-driven events

Simply put, why didn’t a Tier 1 club like BAD get 36-40 hours allotted with residual to GHAC rather than the other way around?

Summary

This is not about one season or a single dispute. It’s about whether Burlington chooses to support its own long-standing, community-based clubs — or allows them to be displaced by regional organizations whose roots, resources, and loyalties lie outside our city. It’s also about ensuring the City works only with organizations that operate with integrity and put Burlington’s youth first.

I’ve copied the appropriate parties because this matter demands serious and immediate attention.  Competitive swim programs require planning that begins a full year in advance. Every day of delay makes recovery more difficult — and the longer this goes unaddressed, the greater the harm to athletes, families, and the broader community. I continue to believe that Council has the ability — and the responsibility — to correct course and protect BAD swimmers. I believe cancellation provisions within the contracts allow for this.  A course correction as described above would certainly afford GHAC much more time to adjust than was given to BAD for the current season (about three months in total).   In the end, the swimmers are the ones most deeply hurt. Older athletes who placed their trust in the City and in BAD are now left with a mere shadow of the community that existed only a few months ago.  It’s not about the clubs themselves.

On a personal level, the impact on my family has been heartbreaking. The uncertainty over the summer led to decreased BAD enrolment, rising costs, and a decline in volunteer support — all of which strained BAD’s ability to function effectively. BAD, which once held a clear affordability advantage over GHAC, has largely lost that position. My daughter had no choice but to withdraw her two youngest children due to rising costs — a shameful and unnecessary outcome.  She isn’t alone. She will continue with BAD for my eldest grandchild since she has been in BAD since 7 years of age, however with only two years until university, she too has been negatively impacted.  She has seen her nine-year journey with BAD unravel as her teammates and close friends were scattered. Her trust has been broken.   Burlington families like mine are now facing these rising costs simply to maintain what they had — a place within BAD.  They did nothing to cause this. It’s not fair.

What makes this situation even more distressing is how disconnected the City’s actions seem from the broader value BAD provides. BAD isn’t just a swim club — it’s a community built over decades, encompassing not only current swimmers and parents but generations of alumni who remain deeply invested in its future. This was clearly demonstrated by a recent petition, which received overwhelming support far beyond what current enrolment alone might suggest. BAD’s legacy was intentionally created through decades of dedication and community engagement, and it deserves not just recognition, but preservation and continuation.

BAD has given thousands of young people far more than swimming skills. It has instilled confidence, time management, a sense of belonging, and lifelong friendships. It supports local events, promotes healthy lifestyles, and keeps youth engaged and focused. BAD is a Burlington success story — and it must not be allowed to fall apart. Yet its survival is increasingly threatened by decisions that could have been avoided and, in my view, are inconsistent with the “Tiering” best practice.  Any further delay in correcting course will only deepen the harm already done and the probability of collapse.

How could something so positive, so deeply rooted in this community, be dismantled? Why?  BAD did nothing wrong.  It defies logic, undermines fairness, and — above all — is morally wrong.  It is worthy of repeating — BAD’s legacy should be recognized, valued, and protected — not erased.

Pam Pitz

Burlington, Ontario

Editor’s note: The Integrity Commissioner is not the level at which a complaint/concern can be registered.  There is a member of Council in the process of bringing a Motion to have this issue reviewed by the City’s Audit Committee.