The mayor of Kamloops got yet another pay cut after an investigator found he violated conflict of interest laws.

It comes months after a code of conduct complaint claiming Mayor Reid Hamer-Jackson took part in a council vote which involved a developer he’s suing. It ended with a damning conclusion that could puts his job in public office at risk.

Although investigator Reece Harding tried to get Hamer-Jackson to cooperate, both by agreeing to an interview or proving he got legal advice to absolve him of the conflict, the mayor apparently knew the risk he was about to take.

“I will attend the courts when 10 citizens want to have me disqualified due to being in a conflict of interest. That way the judge will decide not you and the same jury you present your investigation to? (sic)” Hamer-Jackson said in a Feb. 19 written response to Harding.

As iNFOnews.ca reported last week, a conflict of interest finding opens the door to either 10 citizens or a two-thirds council vote to file a court application that could have a sitting mayor disqualified from office.

When speaking to media about code of conduct complaints against him, Hamer-Jackson frequently refers to council as the “jury” and accuses Harding, a lawyer with the firm Young Anderson, of telling council what they want to hear.

The complaint arose when Hamer-Jackson voted on a temporary BC Housing shelter to be built at a property owned by Joshua Knaak’s company, a developer who the mayor is suing for defamation. Hamer-Jackson had previously cited the conflict of interest on another property connected to Knaak, but he changed his mind when the shelter matter came up.

BC laws setting out how local officials navigate conflicts of interest require them to get legal advice before absolving themselves of a previously declared conflict. Hamer-Jackson gave no proof of any advice from a lawyer on the matter, either to the city or to Harding.

On July 29, council opted to give Hamer-Jackson one more chance to prove he got legal advice within seven days. An opportunity he missed and now faces several sanctions, including one more 10 per cent cut to his salary.

He also refused to take part in the investigation itself.

In his report, Harding said Hamer-Jackson did not answer questions about the complaint, instead repeatedly choosing to take issue with previous investigations and the with experienced local government lawyer’s ability to remain unbiased.

Harding proceeded after he determined he was able to come to an unbiased conclusion.

When he did, he found it was “clear” Hamer-Jackson was in a conflict of interest. Though it didn’t affect him financially, his personal litigation with Knaak had mixed with his duty to represent the city in voting on a temporary permit for a homeless shelter. He was the sole opposing vote on the shelter.

Harding found a reasonable person would find his vote on the shelter permit was “personal in nature.”

“There is a substantial likelihood that reasonably well-informed members of the public would believe that the mayor cast his vote in this way to punish or disadvantage Mr. Knaak on the basis of his personal dispute with him,” Harding’s report read.

The pay cut could grow to 30 per cent of Hamer-Jackson’s salary if he doesn’t abide by council sanctions.

He was given 30 days to sign a letter of apology to Knaak and 60 days to take mandatory training on local government laws. If not followed, each of those will result in a further 10 per cent pay cut.