CITY – Ruling says use of AAP to authorize PAC, sports projects was OK
Kathrine Wunderlich talks with reporters outside City council meeting last year. (Image: Mel Rothenburger)
City Hall won its day in court today (Feb. 21, 2025) on the question of whether its use of the alternative approval process was proper in getting approval for a new performing arts centre and other amenities.
Justice Joel Groves ruled in favour of the City on all challenges presented by a member of Kamloops Citizens United, confirming that the City used the AAP in accordance with the law, appropriately estimated the number of eligible electors, provided adequate public notification, allowed more time than required for the process, and acted reasonably in all respects.
A petition filed by resident Kathrine Wunderlich of KCU contended that approval should have been sought through a referendum, not an AAP. She asked that the borrowing bylaws approved through the AAP be quashed, alleging that the City “failed to follow a lawful and transparent process aligned with the spirit and intent of the legislation,” disregarded “a significant and vulnerable elector population” and derided opponents of the projects.
She said today she will appeal Groves’ ruling.
In September, the City obtained elector approval for two borrowing bylaws that will fund the construction of the Kamloops Centre for the Arts, the design and construction of an arena multiplex, and the advancement of other recreational facilities, including a curling and racquet sport complex, an aquatic centre, and an indoor fieldhouse.
The use of the alternative approval process proved controversial because it didn’t require residents to vote yes or no. If they didn’t return a form, they were considered to have voted in favour of the $275-million package of projects.
Wunderlich filed a challenge to the alternative approval processes within the 30-day limitation period, compelling the City to mount a legal defence to be tested in a court of law.
Groves’ ruling means borrowing for the projects can proceed.
“We are thrilled with the outcome, and with this legal clarity we are ready to take the next steps in fulfilling this community vision,” said Coun. Kelly Hall, the Build Kamloops committee chair.
The Kamloops Centre for the Arts, which has been a top priority for more than 20 years, but was defeated in an earlier referendum, is progressing through detailed design with the integrated project delivery team. Similarly, the arena multiplex design is on track, with updates expected next month, according to the City.
“Council has been unanimous in its support of Build Kamloops. It’s unfortunate that the actions of one resident have resulted in additional costs to all local taxpayers to defend a legal, democratic process,” said Hall.
“We look forward to putting this behind us and building the amenities our growing community needs to thrive.”
ArmchairMayor.ca 
I can’t wait for the next election. Anyone associated with KCU is gonna look so incredibly ridiculous.
LikeLike
The more this group challenges and delays the PAC and the sports facilities, the more it will cost everyone.
Before you make a decision whether or not to appeal, go get legal advice to determine whether or not you have any grounds to do so. My fingers are crossed that you don’t have any grounds, and if you choose to continue the legal process, that any costs of appeal will be awarded to the City.
LikeLike
Imagine a world where litigants that aren’t frivolous are effectively fined for bringing a case against a public entity with what amounts to a bottomless legal fund. In effect, you’re advocating that public bodies be made unaccountable to regular citizens in the justice system, which would lead them to act with even more impunity than they currently do. That public bodies be shielded from lawsuits against waste of public funds, so that public funds can be saved.
I cannot understand any argument for such a thing, and it’s quite a wild thing to consider – that citizens actively advocate for further reducing access to judicial recourse that is already difficult to access,.not only for financial reasons.
The very council who voted to spend $2.2 million of your tax dollars to build a bike lane to nowhere, the same council now saying it’s a boondoggle flop, is happy to have your advocacy for ensuring citizens are doubly financially punished for trying to correct what they see as an egregious error.
$2.2 million on a bike path everyone said was a complete useless joke, and you’re wanting for this group to pay costs…
I have a pedestrian bridge near the TRU crosswalk to sell you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
– Did the AAP process follow legislation as it was intended to be used? Yes.
– Number of eligible electors, adequate public notification, and acted reasonably in all respects … all such questions … absolutely.
– Was it the best or most appropriate tool to do this? Not really.
– Can Kamloops, via our own mandate powers, or via BC Municipalities, or Provincial courts … remove the ability for the city to use the AAP process for projects over a certain dollar value or whatever safeguard we want?
That may be a question worth asking and chatting about.
Here’s the thing. You cant say in the middle of a thing, that you cant do the thing, if the rules and standards say that you absolutely CAN do the thing.
Thats just how laws work.
If you want to change something, you cant decide that it needs to stop or change on the fly, if it followed the rules to get there. It requires a change in the system. Judges and the like can only decide cases on the laws provided, they do not make law.
I’m reminded of the case where a Skip driver was pulled over for distracted driving because his work took – his phone – gave him a work job and he had to press one button to accept it, or not work. He cant work without pressing one button. This isnt texting, it isnt doom scrolling, its an ‘accept’ button.
He got the ticket, and the judge backed it up, as even though he sympathized and offered that maybe legislative work needed to be done … the law as written was what he had to work with.
Same deal here, you get a PAC and Ice Rink now, because they followed the law. If you dont want it used this way again, tell the city to change the rules, or elect those with a mandate to do so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Would it be appropriate and possible for someone to organize a “Go Fund Me” page to help Kathrine with her legal fees?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The only concern I have is that she should have been made to cover the court costs.
LikeLike