
A Kamloops city councillor has filed his response to a B.C. Supreme Court petition seeking to remove him from office, saying he doesn’t stand to gain financially from a planned arena multiplex — and asserting the petitioners haven't shown any evidence to support their claim that he does.
Coun. Mike O’Reilly’s response says the petition seeking his removal from city council is “replete with speculation, inference and assumptions.”
“The petitioners have tendered no evidence that Coun. O’Reilly has a pecuniary interest in either the development of the arena multiplex generally, or the location of the arena multiplex specifically, arising from his role as president, CEO or a shareholder in Comet,” the document reads.
In October, 10 Kamloops voters filed a petition in B.C. Supreme Court, asking a judge to disqualify O’Reilly from holding office due to an alleged conflict of interest.
The petitioners said O’Reilly, who is the president and CEO of Comet Industries — a company developing a light industrial park in the Iron Mask area — was in a conflict of interest because he didn’t recuse himself from discussions or votes connected to the $135-million Build Kamloops arena multiplex project in Dufferin.
O’Reilly is seeking to dismiss the petition, and to have his legal costs covered by the petitioners.
“There is no merit to the petition, either in fact or in law,” his response said.
'Expressly denied'
The arena multiplex is slated to be built on a city-owned property at 2070 Hillside Dr., about four kilometres east of the plot of land O’Reilly’s company is developing.
The petitioners argued O’Reilly, who is also chair of council’s Build Kamloops committee, stands to gain financially as the location of the arena multiplex could “potentially increase” Iron Mask Industrial Park’s lot values and sales.
O’Reilly's response to the petition, filed on Dec. 23, said there hasn’t been any irregularities in the trading value of Comet shares since the arena multiplex location was unveiled.
His response said if there was any pecuniary interest, which the claim said is "expressly denied," it would be insignificant considering O’Reilly’s small ownership stake in Comet. He said he owns about 0.389 per cent of the company.
The response noted there are 3,387 parcels located within a four-kilometre drive of the multiplex location, so if there was any monetary gain to be had based on proximity to the future facility, it’s something O’Reilly would generally have in common with electors.
The response also noted B.C.’s Community Charter sets out a 45-day time limit for electors to file a petition — a clock that starts ticking at the time when an alleged basis for disqualification is made known.
O’Reilly said one of the petitioners, Patrick Snell, was present at a July meeting where council voted on a Build Kamloops-related decision — 92 days before the petition was submitted — and therefore, the filing is “statute barred.”
O'Reilly awarded costs
A B.C. Supreme Court judge has already ruled in O'Reilly's favour on a related matter, telling the 10 voters they were not allowed to add an 11th petitioner to the case.
In a Dec. 19 hearing, Justice Brad Smith ruled the petitioners would have to cover O’Reilly’s costs for that specific hearing.
Sara Dubinsky, O’Reilly’s lawyer, said petitioners have to follow specific rules to change or add a party, and they hadn’t followed this process.
She also argued by adding an 11th name, the group was trying to circumvent the Community Charter’s 45-day time limit for filing the petition. She said if Snell were to drop out based on his presence at the July vote, there would only be nine petitioners remaining — and 10 are required.
Bronwyn Scott, who is acting as agent for the petitioners, said they weren’t trying to circumvent the process, maintaining the group didn’t have full knowledge of the alleged conflict of interest until later in the year.
She said they thought because the 11th person, Rocky Barrass, had evidence to bring before the court, there wouldn’t be an issue adding him to the list of petitioners later on.
She asked for the court’s forgiveness, saying it was an honest mistake.
“I appreciate for the uninitiated, embarking on a voyage of civil litigation can very quickly mean stormy seas — expensive stormy seas,” Smith replied to Scott. “But unfortunately, when you embark on that voyage, that’s the voyage you’re on.”
Scott said she remained confident about the group’s arguments in the petition.
“We’ll take our knocks,” she said.
Smith said his decision on the matter won't have any bearing on later hearings for the petition itself.
Parties will return to court
Neither O’Reilly’s lawyer or the lawyer for the City of Kamloops, Tyson McNeil-Hay, objected to Scott — who is not a lawyer herself — acting as the petitioners' agent for the Dec. 19 hearing.
But the matter might be brought up in later proceedings.
In its response to the petition, the City of Kamloops noted non-lawyers are not allowed to practice law, and while the court has the discretion to allow a non-lawyer agent to represent for a litigant, “this discretion should be exercised with restraint.”
The petition’s signees are Katherine Dunn, Beat Klossner, Patrick Snell, Lynda Engli, Gerd Dessau, Deborah Kuipers, Patricia Carlson, Howard King, Denis Walsh, and Christine Schieberle.
Along with seeking O’Reilly’s disqualification, the petitioners are also asking the court to void the municipality’s decision on the location of the multiplex and order the City of Kamloops to undertake a new process to determine the site of the facility.