Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson (image credit - CFJC Today)

By Michael Reeve

CITY AUDIT

Mayor Hamer-Jackson’s unusual approach to pass notice of motion bears no fruit

Jun 25, 2025 | 4:53 PM

KAMLOOPS — Kamloops Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson called earlier this month for a forensic audit of city hall.

His three-page notice of motion was all encompassing, with his proposal’s stated purpose to investigate all city of Kamloops departments and management practices.

There was broad support from council to at least see the motion debated on Tuesday [June 24] afternoon during a council meeting, but proceedings never reached that point.

Before his motion was on the table, Hamer-Jackson questioned council members to find out if a secret meeting was held to determine the fate of the motion.

Stay Ahead of the Curve with Kamloops' Trusted Property Manager - Rohit Kumar

May 20, 2025

SOUND OFF

Supporting families with reproductive services

Jul 10, 2025

ONE MAN'S OPINION

COLLINS: The NDP continues its ignorance

Jul 10, 2025

“Have you spoken in an online meeting in quorum or have you in a CAO agenda review meeting?” asked Hamer-Jackson.

Councillor Mike O’Reilly responded, saying there have been no secret meetings of council as a whole to discuss the motion.

“You are actually pushing me further away from supporting it because you are making accusations not only against staff and how we run or city, but us, as well,” councillor Bill Sarai said. “And then you are giving me that look that we are doing something wrong, when in fact you are not doing your job to get a motion passed through council. The will of council, you need four councillors to support you. You can’t even get one because of the way you act.”

The line of questioning from the mayor spurred pushback from each councillor, with Kelly Hall taking a strong stand.

“This request is anything but right,” Hall said. “It’s poorly presented. It’s crafted by a group of henchmen that really want to try to tear down and burn down the city hall.”

Eventually, Hall moved the motion in an attempt to correct course. It was seconded by Katie Neustaeter.

The unusual attempt at governing from Hamer-Jackson backfired, with the motion falling long before any substantial and meaningful debate or dialogue occurred.

After a brief exchange between the mayor and councillor Neustaeter, he attempted to have her removed from chambers.

“I’m going to ask a CSO to ask you to leave,” Hamer-Jackson told Neustaeter. “You are out of order.”

“Then let’s go together, happily. You step out. I’ll step out,” Neustaeter said.

“No, you go. Will you please remove councillor Neustaeter from the room?” requested Hamer-Jackson.

“Please allow us to debate the motion and stop attacking members of council with misinformation,” asked Neustaeter, who was not removed from the chambers. “Please allow us to debate.”

Despite the motion’s defeat, there was underlying support from around the horseshoe for an audit.

“I think there are some good things in what you put forward,” Karpuk said. “I think in talking with my colleagues, many of us agreed. We have heard from the public clearly. They would like to see this. But, as it was written, I could not support it because of the amount of bias and that what we were asking our staff to do if we endorsed that would have been inappropriate from a board of governance position.”