CITY HALL – Petitioners consider appealing judge’s decision on O’Reilly

The petitioners who alleged Coun. Mike O’Reilly was in a conflict of interest over the Build Kamloops ice rink project say they might appeal a judge’s dismissal of their case.

In a decision released Tuesday (May 27, 2025), Justice Kenneth Ball rejected the group’s claims and awarded costs to O’Reilly.

The 10 petitioners wanted O’Reilly disqualified from office based on connection to Comet Industries, of which he is CEO and president, a company developing an industrial park on Iron Mask Road 3.9 km. from the location of the ice rink. He also served as chair of the City’s Build Kamloops committee.

They claimed Comet Industries could benefit from the proximity of the two properties and contended the location of the ice facility should be voided.

In his ruling, Ball said “the evidence that was submitted suffers from substantive as well as formal deficiencies” and that speculation that the Iron Mask property could benefit was ”based on belief and conjecture.”

He also noted that the Community Charter requires conflict of interest petitions to be filed with the B.C. Supreme Court within 45 days of a petitioner becoming aware of a possible conflict.

Ball said there has been “little variation” in the value of Comet Industry’s publicly traded shares since the announcement of the location of the ice arena.

The judged concluded that “the petition herein is dismissed in its entirety” and that: “the petitioners submitted that they should be protected from an adverse award of court costs if the petition was not successful. There is no basis in fact nor law to support this submission and no submission of any substance was made by the petitioners. Both Councillor O’Reilly and the City of Kamloops have been successful and are, in my view, entitled to their costs payable forthwith by the petitioners, jointly and severally….”

Bronwen Scott, spokesperson for the 10 petitioners, said the group spent at least 400 hours researching and compiling evidence and about $5,000 in bringing the case to court.

“This was not a frivolous claim.”