Cathedral funds under threat

$7m in ratepayer money promised for restoration could be withheld if building is mothballed

Millions of dollars of ratepayer money promised to Christ Church Cathedral restoration could be retained by the city council if the building is mothballed.

Christchurch City Council decided in 2017 to grant $10 million toward the rebuild of the Christ Church Cathedral. The following year, the council introduced a 10-year ratepayer levy to fund the grant, which sees each rate-paying household contribute $6.52 a year until 2028.

The Christ Church Cathedral Reinstatement Ltd (CCRL), the charitable company managing the rebuild, received a $3m instalment from the council in December 2023 and the remaining $7m is due to be paid on August 1. However, there is doubt over whether that transaction will proceed. In April, CCRL announced the cost to restore the cathedral had skyrocketed to $248m, up from the $160m forecast a year earlier, leaving a $114m funding gap. It also said that unless $30m could be found by August 31, the building would be mothballed indefinitely.

At a council Long Term Plan workshop last week, councillor Sara Templeton said when the decision was made in 2017, the resolution stated the money must be applied to the rebuild. “If the cathedral was going to be mothballed, the funds could not be applied to a mothballed process because that is not a rebuild.”

Council community support and partnerships head John Filsell confirmed after the workshop that the drawdown of the remaining $7m was conditional on the conditions of the council’s 2017 resolution being met. That resolution states the money was to be spent on the capital cost of the restoration.

Filsell would not say when a decision would be made on whether the council would hand over the money or not. During the workshop, Filsell said the council was observing and looking at the recent developments to make a determination on the issue.

“If there is doubt, we would recommend a report go to council to get clarity to make sure the intent of council’s original decision making is upheld.” When asked after the briefing if the council would delay the payment until a decision was made on the future of the cathedral, Filsell said it was too early to provide an informed summary of the potential options available to the council. But he said decisions of that nature were usually made in the public section of a meeting.

A staff presentation at the workshop stated in the event the $7m payment was suspended the council could either continue to collect, suspend or defer the special rate until the decision on the future of the project and the council’s role was established. “Funds currently held by the council will continue to earn interest reducing future targeted rate requirements.”

CCRL chairman Mark Stewart and Anglican Bishop Peter Carrell would not say if they were concerned the $7m might not come through or what the impact of that might be on the project. They said work continued on the restoration, albeit at a reduced pace, and if work was suspended, CCRL would “agree a suitable course of action with council”.

The $10m has already been built into the CCRL’s budget, making up $134m in current and planned funding, leaving the $114m gap.

Stewart and Carrell were also not particularly forthcoming about CCRL’s progress toward obtaining the $30m to prevent the mothballing.

In April, the pair said their main sources of funding were likely to be the council and the Government. Late last week they said CCRL had not made any formal funding requests to the Government or the council.

When asked how CCRL expected to obtain the money if it had not put in a formal request, Stewart and Carrell said CCRL was “exploring all potential funding options”.

During the council briefing last week, mayor Phil Mauger said the cathedral team was talking with central Government.

Stewart and Carrell said CCRL had been exploring funding solutions and in the first instance had prioritised engagement with the church and council officials.

“We have had no feedback from council or Government about funding the shortfall.”

They confirmed the intention was still to mothball if a funding pathway could not be confirmed by August 31.