CITY HALL – Mayor faces more pay cuts after conflict of interest investigation
(Image: Mel Rothenburger)
Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson is facing new cuts in pay after a Code of Conduct investigation found he had a conflict of interest in a vote late last year on a North Shore property.
The cuts could total as much as 30 per cent.
The code complaint, filed by Coun. Dale Bass, stated the mayor should not have voted on a temporary use permit to allow a homeless shelter on a Tranquille Road property owned in part by Joshua Knaak. Hamer-Jackson is suing Knaak for defamation in connection with another matter.
The mayor said at the time he had received legal advice that he wasn’t in a conflict.
However, Vancouver lawyer Reece Harding, hired by the City to conduct the investigation, concluded that Hamer-Jackson had a non-pecuniary conflict of interest. At a July 29, 2025 closed meeting, City council directed him to provide within seven days a description of the legal advice he received, apologize to Knaak within 30 days, and take mandatory training on conflicts of interest and his oath of office within 60 days.
Although Hamer-Jackson has taken such training in the past, if he doesn’t do it again he’ll lose another 10 per cent of his salary in addition to 10 per cent for not providing proof of his legal advice on the conflict and another 10 per cent if he doesn’t apologize.
As well, a public censure is to be published on the City’s website. He was notified of the council decision Aug. 1.
Harding noted that Hamer-Jackson declined to be interviewed for the investigation but that he did express a lack of confidence in Harding’s impartiality.
Harding’s report highlights the fact that Hamer-Jackson did not provide proof of the legal advice he said he received about the conflict of interest, stating that had he done so, his recommendation would not have included sanctions “or other measures.”
Harding also said whether or not the mayor had policy reasons for voting against the TUP application wasn’t relevant.
“I consider the mayor’s interest a highly personal one, which is clearly distinct from the rest of the Council and certainly distinct from the electorate as a whole.”
Council’s resolution states, in full:
At the July 29, 2025, closed meeting, pursuant to section 4.35 of the Code of Conduct bylaw, Council directed that the appropriate censures, sanctions, corrective actions, and/or other measures warranted by the Breach are as follows:
- Within 7 business days from the date on which the City delivers notice of Council’s July 29, 2025 resolution to him, Mayor Hamer-Jackson must provide to Council a general description of the legal advice he claims to have had on November 26, 2024, together with some objective form of proof, such as confirmation from a lawyer duly qualified to practice law in British Columbia.
- If Mayor Hamer-Jackson fails to provide the objective proof required in paragraph (1) within the stipulated timeline, the remuneration to which he would otherwise be entitled will be automatically reduced by ten percent (10%) until such time as he complies with the requirement.
- Mayor Hamer-Jackson must sign and deliver a letter of apology to Joshua Knaak, in a form and with content approved by Council, within thirty (30) calendar days from the date on which the draft letter of apology is delivered to Mayor Hamer-Jackson.
- If Mayor Hamer-Jackson fails to sign and deliver the letter of apology required in paragraph (2) within the stipulated timeline, the remuneration to which he would otherwise be entitled will be automatically reduced by a further ten percent (10%) until such time as he complies with the requirement.
- Within sixty (60) calendar days from the date on which the City delivers notice of Council’s July 29, 2025 resolution to him, Mayor Hamer-Jackson must take mandatory training on his obligations under the Community Charterand the Local Government Act, including with respect to conflicts of interest and his oath of office.
- If Mayor Hamer-Jackson fails to take the mandatory training required in paragraph (3) within the stipulated timeline, the remuneration to which he would otherwise be entitled will be automatically reduced by a further ten percent (10%) until such time as he complies with the requirement.
- A public censure of Mayor Hamer-Jackson by Council will be published on the Council Leadership and Accountability page of the City’s website, along with all other outstanding censures of Mayor Hamer-Jackson by Council that have not yet been published.
Mayor Hamer-Jackson was provided with Notice of Council’s July 29, 2025 (decision) on August 1, 2025
Harding’s recommended sanction was a five per cent reduction in pay for 12 months if he refused to take the mandatory training. The City’s full release on the matter is published on its website.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
It’s laughable to read comments on here continuously deflecting the mayor’s problems he has created for himself over to Council members alone.
The Mayor is seemingly incapable of recognizing his own role in any of this mess.
The Mayor refuses to participate in the processes that he’s a part of, only to suggest that any outcome is biased and predetermined. What nonsense.
The Mayor has put the city at legal risk numerous times because he doesn’t appear to understand the basic rules of privacy as they relate to working in a public body.
The Mayor has wasted everyone’s time and precious resources throughout his term, by triggering investigatory and court processes with his behaviour.
Yes, several members of Council are a problem (Mr. Sarai most notably). It’s difficult to understand that Mr. Sarai has not resigned for his part in all of this.
But please stop defending the Mayor by only pointing the finger elsewhere.
LikeLike
Mayor conflict of interest
There are only 14 months until the next civic election. Could the Kamloops City Councillors PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE stop investigating conflict of interest, code of conduct and any and all other nitpicking violations against the Mayor? We get it, they don’t like the man and won’t work with him. But now it’s getting to be beyond petty. It’s overkill. What have their constant harassing actions and publicly trashing the Mayor done to benefit the citizens of Kamloops? Absolutely nothing I can discern!! He was elected to the position, they complain that he doesn’t done anything, but they’ve effectively not allowed him to with their many sanctions. To dock his pay beyond even what a biased investigator recommends?? Shameful! They celebrate each and every occasion when they publicly trash the man. How would each of them feel if every time they opened their mouth a bunch of their supposed colleagues rolled their eyes, jumped down their throat and dismissed and mocked anything they had to say? They wring their hands at the Mayor’s supposed bullying and harassing of city staff. What do they call their behaviour towards the mayor – coaching and mentoring?? Maybe not so much. Pot calling kettle back scenario again. Their conduct is reprehensible! And they glory in it!
Maybe they could just work out their remaining terms on Council in silence. PLEASE! Without the constant need to prove their self-professed superiority. It would be a welcome change.
And to the mainstream media who glory in reporting on Council’s latest “triumphs” in attacking the mayor – shame on all of you!! You’re supposed to be unbiased, and you certainly are not!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Within the last month, I don’t recall which meeting exactly, a Councillor voted on a motion. The motion passed I believe. Afterwards, the Councillor declared that they are actually in a conflict and shouldn’t have voted.
By this measure, even with a retraction, shouldn’t this Councillor also face a similar investigation and fine, as by the report, it doesn’t matter what the intention was with voting.
The hipocrasy from this council is so hard to keep track of because it happens constantly.
LikeLike
You raise an interesting point. At City council’s Aug. 12 meeting, a number of matters were brought forward from the Safety and Security Select Committee, including one involving Community Service levels. The motion on the matter was seconded by Coun. Bill Sarai. Later in the meeting, the acting corporate services officer noted that Coun. Sarai had earlier declared a conflict of interest on the subject, presumably because his son is a CSO. “My apologies,” he said, “I didn’t catch that so… I will step out and let you guys vote on it again.” A motion was then passed to rescind the original motion, which was then approved with a new vote. The question arises whether a council member can, in effect, be allowed to retract their vote. This requires a Parliamentary expert to sort out but my reading of Robert’s Rules of orders is that a motion can be rescinded either in the same meeting or in a later meeting, but I can find no reference to doing so because a member has voted in a conflict of interest. There are some parallels with the Hamer-Jackson case, in which the mayor originally declare a conflict in an earlier situation and then said in a later situation involving the same person that he didn’t have a conflict. So, if he were to now ask council to rescind the motion and discussion for which he has been ruled to have a conflict, could council rightfully refuse, having allowed Sarai to do it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Mel
City council and their antics are unbelievable. They should conduct their meetings in a sand box.
Can’t you see some great episodes of “South Park” based on our City Council.
Bev
LikeLike
In my experience dealing with Dale, from the start line of helping her with her first campaign, she has been an absolute failure. She could not even handle assisting with a simple problem of something being leached onto the road. Then came the famous slur of a concentration camp in Rayleigh when a recovery house was suggested. Of course, the infamous suggestion in my mind of her rolling on the floor laughing her ass off is one that remains.
After this term is over, common sense should tell us that 3 years is plenty long enough for any municipal politician to be in office. Recall legislation should also be put in place.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What makes Bass’s “concentration camp” comment even weirder is the fact that in April of this year she suggested that an involuntary rehab facility could be located at the local correctional centre.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am not a fan of the Mayors but this must be taking a toll on him. He probably needs to resign for the sake of his health if nothing else.
LikeLike
I’m surprised we’re not a TV show yet.
LikeLike
The councillors seem very concerned about conflict of interest regarding the mayor. I wonder whether this concern should be extended to their fellow councillors as well.
For instance, if a council member has an immediate family member who is employed by the city, then is it a conflict if that council member votes on issues related to their family member’s boss?
LikeLiked by 1 person
If council could cut taxes as enthusiastically and as often as they cut the Mayor’s salary, this might not be such a bad place to live.
LikeLiked by 2 people