By Gazette Staff
January 3rd, 2026
BURLINGTON, ON
There is no mention, at least not yet, on the city website about an agenda item related to the FIFA opportunity that will cost the city as much as $160,000 if it actually happens.
What the Gazette is seeing is articles in print media on the “predatory World Cup pricing model.”
Officially, FIFA is a not-for-profit body under Swiss law. The cheapest standard seat (known as a category 4 ticket) for the final will start- start at $4,185 and rise to more than double that for the best non-VIP seats – Category 1.
General admission tickets for the Group stage are about three times higher than they were for the 2022 World Cup Games.
This clearly isn’t priced for the family to attend a game.
Emilie Cote is leading the RCC effort to have the FIFA Caravan come to Burlington.
While we have yet to learn just where the Recreation, Community and Culture people are with their efforts to bring the FIFA Caravan to the city – one has to ask if Burlington wants to do business with an organization that is rapacious in just about everything they do.
Granted,it is the biggest sports event in the world – bigger than the Olympics.
We will have to wait and see what city staff have to report.
Focus Burlington did a survey on what people thought about the spending of the $160,000 – they came up with an amount of $200,000. Link to that story is HERE
Discover more from Burlington Gazette - Local News, Politics, Community
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The John Doe comment and the editorial comment about it are both silly imo. Rather telling, also.
Don’t see where “Mr. Smith’s” comment is complaining. I think his suggested reasonings are worth considering and that several of them likely apply. Nor is it a secret he was involved with the former resident group, which by the way did good work from all members, including him.
I think it’s wrong on all levels to have spent even $5 on a corrupt organization like FIFA, worse that it was done with no transparency, and yet it is so typical of this mayor and council, in both their “look at me/here’s 100 selfies/how can I get even bigger press coverage,” and in their “your money is our money to use to campaign for ourselves” mantras.
Bottom line is: they don’t care what we think; they seem to use staff to supposedly come up with decisions that they want and then fall all over them, sort of as a cover perhaps. Maybe I’m wrong but this is my impression. I am still working to oppose the undemocratic strong mayor powers in Ontario, and the more I research that topic, the more suspicious I am about the inner workings of municipal staff in places such as Burlington where the mayor supports and uses these powers. We need to elect a mayor who values democracy, majority rule, and doesn’t support the ability to hire and fire senior staff without council approval. It creates dysfunction and can easily be manipulated.
Should city staff recommend expense after expense, with council approving each recommendation?
Do we pay taxes to create opportunities for the current council to post photographs of themselves with celebrity soccer players on social media? Is this a good look during an election campaign?
Focus Burlington is working to engage with residents. Burlington doesn’t need another group telling us how to live and what to do; our current council is already doing a great job of that. Remember to ride your bike when you attend the FIFA Caravan.
The Focus Burlington article referenced above was written for inclusion in our newsletter. The newsletter was emailed to subscribers after the article was written, and the number of survey respondents has more than doubled.
Focus Burlington is not a political party with a platform. Our platform is democracy. Councillor Sharman stated that Burlington residents make one decision (voting for a councillor). After that, the councillor makes the decision. This is a far cry from representation by population. Surveys help to understand what people in Burlington are interested in. The results will be shared with council. What they do with those results is beyond the electorate’s control.
Click here to complete the survey
My reply is also to an apparent Doppelgänger with the unlikely “handle” of John Doe.
Ouch – hit a nerve did I John/Eric? I have mentioned that I was part of BRAG several times in other places. But, if you think it necessary, I shall include that caveat each time I comment on something FocusBurlington related.
As you know, I believe (as did most of BRAG) that surveys should be a very carefully crafted, scientific vehicle for obtaining an accurate and truly representative reading of what ‘the public’ thinks and believes. Anything crafted otherwise is, at best, misrepresentative and anecdotal. You differed in your opinion.
And, as I remember, I put much meat on the bones of a policy framework that you, specifically, found unnecessary – and you dissolved BRAG accordingly.
Editor’s note: This is going to be the last comment we publish on the BRAG community group. There are strong personal differences that the group is going to have to work out on their own. This is not the place for those differences to be aired.
Agree – but with all due respect, the BRAG connection was raised by “John Doe” not me.
Last comment.
Mr Smith seems to want Focus B to be everything to everyone. Nothing wrong with being a 1 trick pony – if the pony is making a much-needed comment on a serious issue.
Lots of complaining on Smith’s part; not much meat on the bones. Smith fails to mention that he was part of the organization that preceded Focus. Let’s be fulsome in our discussions if you don’t mind.
Editor’s note>
Our practice is not to encourage the use of John Doe as a signature. In this instance we were able to identify who John Doe is and fully understand why he/she would not want to be identified.
“Focus Burlington did a survey on what people thought about the spending of the $160,000.”
And the number of people who responded is only 92 so far. I’m unsure what the small number of respondents tells us. It could be many things:
– that the total membership of FocusBurlington, including family and friends, is 92
– that most people really don’t care [any more]
– that the whole issue has received very little attention so far
– that there really is no pervasive, unaligned media presence in Burlington; the “news” just isn’t getting out
– that citizens have lost hope with the ability to influence COB Council and Staff
– that “wallet issues” just don’t have the same traction as 2 years ago
– that FocusBurlington is still pretty much a 1 trick pony interested primarily in COB spending/fiscal accountability and little else (truly)
– that FocusBurlington is in love with surveys but that the love is totally unrequited; unreciprocated by those nasty harpies of statistical relevance, proposition neutrality or scientific design.
– all or none of the above
I believe that FocusBurliington’s objective is to vet and endorse a slate of like-minded candidates for the municipal election in 2026. If the principles and policies that would generate endorsement are unambiguous and well-defined, then this is commendable, regardless of political alignment. But I think that a great deal of the policy framework remains to be clearly articulated and broadly communicated. Otherwise, like the surveys, I’m not sure what the endorsement actually means.
HOPEFULLY NOT.
This $160,000.00 could be better spent.
One use could be to defend the city if Council does not pass the” hotel on steroids”application on Old Lakeshore Road and it goes to the OLT.
Is there no common sense anymore at City Hall.
Editor’s note: How could this development go to the OLT. The city came out a recommendation for the development.
I believe that Mr. Bentivegna thinks that this will “put Burlington on the map”. Unfortunately, he had his mic turned off at the time of the presentation. So, he is still labouring under the misconception that FIFA stands for “Friends of Italy Food Association”. Won’t he be shocked when he asks for a complimentary biscotti!