CITY HALL – Mayor says it was an ambush but he’ll re-send FOI records

Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson says he’ll comply with a City council demand that he turn over records by today (March 11, 2026) involving a Freedom of Information application but continues to insist he’s already complied.

In what the mayor described as “a complete ambush,” Coun. Margot Middleton presented a motion during Tuesday’s weekly council meeting accusing him of failing to provide the records, and directing him to come up with them within 24 hours or face financial consequences.

The FOI application from a “media applicant” was filed with the City on August 5, 2025, asking for copies of the mayor’s correspondence relating to City or mayoral business, excluding City personnel or members of council, during June and July.

The mayor said today he will always comply with FOI applications “100 per cent,” and has asked Middleton to re-send him a list of “what’s missing.” As of this morning’s interview with ArmchairMayor.ca, he said he hadn’t received a reply.

In her three-page motion, the councillor said Hamer-Jackson was asked multiple times for the records and has failed to produce them. The motion tells him he must also now provide a letter confirming that he’s done a thorough search for them.

But the mayor puts the blame on a “glitch” with Middleton’s cell phone, though Middleton said in her motion the City’s IT department has confirmed she didn’t receive the mayor’s texts on her City-issued phone. He explained that Middleton became involved in the matter because he isn’t allowed to communicate directly with staff. For example, he said, if he tries sending an email to Stephanie Nichols, the City’s privacy officer, it’s blocked.

“The deputy mayors are in control of who I talk to. They block me from so many people.”

Therefore, he said, the FOI application was forwarded to Middleton, who in turn forwarded it to him. He said there weren’t very many records relevant to the application but he texted them to Middleton Aug. 26 as requested. There were nine screenshots of correspondence, he said, adding that he asked her to acknowledge receipt.

Hamer-Jackson copied several texts to ArmchairMayor.ca today that he said back up his version of events, including one in September suggesting Middleton get her phone checked. Middleton texted him back, “So I received this text so obviously my text is working.”

The mayor said he’s been in contact with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in Victoria, which advised him it would be okay to contact the applicant. He said he guessed who the applicant was, though the identity is normally not revealed to the person being asked to supply records.

Hamer-Jackson said he did so, and sent the applicant the records directly. He also emailed Nichols on Sept. 6 that he had given the information to Middleton on Aug. 26.

In Tuesday’s motion, Middleton said the applicant filed a complaint to the OIPC on Nov. 6, 2025 about not receiving the records, and that it was elevated to a formal inquiry this past Feb. 19.

The motion also recites several dates on which Hamer-Jackson was reminded he must provide the records, including one that states: “On September 11, 2025, the City advised Mayor Hamer-Jackson that while he may have previously attemptedto send the responsive records for the Request to Councillor Middleton, the responsive records were never received. As a result, he will need to re-send the responsive records to the City’s Privacy Officer.”

Hamer-Jackson said today the direction to send records to the privacy officer violates the council’s own ban on him communicating with staff.

Middleton’s motion, approved by council over the objection of the mayor, says he “must” provide the requested records within 24 hours or council will convene a hearing to consider whether to make him pay all resulting costs, which may include “staff time, legal fees and disbursements, and any and all fines or other penalties imposed by the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. The full amount may then be deducted from any remuneration to which Mayor Hamer-Jackson would otherwise be entitled.”

While signalling his intention today to meet the demands in the motion, Hamer-Jackson repeated his belief that it’s just one more attempt to get him to resign or be “charged with something.”

“It’s just pathetic.”