I think ghoris and West Coast Greeny are right in the particulars.
84% of Council sounds good, but anyone involved in BCNDP politics knows it is not decisive. 40% of MLAs apparently wanting her gone is also not decisive. But, even if they are a 'motley crew', that means absolutley nothing.
That the party is 'not decisvely opposed' to the leader is not good enough. She must prove that. But she and those around her are going to plow ahead as long as it is not proven she cannot put it behind her [while spinning that James has already put it behind and the party supports her].
There are only two ways out of this stalemate. One is that the issue is forced by a real and exlicit leadership rival stepping forward [or possibly a coherent , well organized and pretty unified drive for a leadership race]. The other is a long drawn out war of attrition, where if the stalemate is not ended James will have no choice but to quit.
The second possibility is guaranteed to be long, and might never end. And the first would not be quick [though it could force the second].
To answer Duncan's question in the OP- there is nothing formal to stop dissdent MLAs from meeting. It would be a pretty heavy step beyond where they already are. Nothing should be ruled out in BC. But also, they can have pretty extensive conversations, and even come to decisions, without having to meet. You could do that even before electronic communication was universal.