Mayor praises ‘prudent’ $2b budget as opposing councillors warn of cost-of-living pain

Tuesday, 23 June 2026

Christchurch mayor Phil Mauger says it’s a positive outcome for the city. (File photo)

Christchurch homeowners will face a 7.35% rates increase from next week - that’s an extra $310 a year, or about $6 a week.

Mayor Phil Mauger and many city councillors praised themselves and staff on Tuesday for developing a 2026/27 budget that provided a balance between community expectations and spending ratepayers’ money prudently.

But for some councillors the rates increase was too high and did nothing to address the cost of living or homelessness.

The Christchurch City Council approved an almost $2 billion budget on Tuesday, following months of briefings, consultation, hearings and deliberations.

The council will spend $1.37b on the day-to-day services it delivers and $597.4m on new infrastructure and facilities.

The average overall rates increase of 7.83% is lower than the 7.96% proposed in the draft plan. The average increase for homeowners is 7.35%, based on the average home value of $845,000, lifting the annual rates bill to $4542.

The decision confirmed the council’s commitment to divert a chunk of its $44m surplus into giving $15m each to the restoration of Christ Church Cathedral and Canterbury Museum, and $4m to the Christchurch School of Music for its new central city building.

Christchurch City Council has approved its 2026/27 budget and confirmed the rates increase that comes into force on July 1.

The museum will also get a $28.6m loan, with interest, to be paid back over 25 years via an international visitor charge.

However, the money will only be handed over if the trio can prove they have enough money from other sources to finish their projects. With the cathedral and the museum, the money is contingent on the Government at least matching the council’s contribution.

Cr Celeste Donovan wanted to know if there was a deadline to the council’s offer.

Staff said there was not, but Cr Nathaniel Herz Jardine asked if, in five years time, the funding conditions had not been met, could council take the money out of the pool?

Mauger said the offer would not be there “for ever and ever”.

“It may well be that it never gets taken up. We have put our foot in the water and it’s up to others to grab the ball and run with it.”

Cr Yani Johanson did not support the rates increase. (File photo)

Cr Mark Peters said the baton had been passed to the cathedral and the museum and it was up to them to get the Government to the table and secure matching grants.

“They have got a bit of work to do. Our money is not guaranteed.”

Crs Donovan, Yani Johanson and Andrei Moore voted against giving the cathedral $15m and Tyrone Fields abstained. Crs Aaron Keown, Johanson and Moore voted against the rates increase.

Keown said the rates increase was 2.5 times the inflation rate of 3.1% and eventually rates would become as high as people’s mortgages.

“We do need to get our spending down. I don’t think we’ve cut our cloth enough again this year.”

Cr Aaron Keown says the council needed to get its spending down further. (File photo)

Johanson said he was struggling with the budget. He was concerned the council was not doing anything to raise additional revenue from the stadium, which came at a sizeable cost to ratepayers.

Ratepayers will pay $166 per household toward stadium debt in the 2026/27 year.

Johanson said he did not agree with the council putting millions into the cathedral when money could be going to address homelessness and unaffordability.

Cr Jake McLellan pushed back, accusing the two councillors of grandstanding.

He said it was “extremely disappointing” when councillors quote inflation figures that were not relevant because household inflation was not the same as construction cost increases.

McLellan said it was not true to say the council was funding the cathedral instead of homelessness.

“The really oldest trick in the book is to be part of collective decision making and have input at every workshop and meeting and now that we’re in public say ‘I don’t want a bar of the budget’.”

Mauger said the annual plan process had been a robust and collaborative effort that resulted in a positive outcome for the city.

He said the rates increase included the city’s water charges, which was something to be pleased about because in some other areas, council water charges were in addition to the rates increase.

“We have listened, debated and, ultimately, done our best to make prudent decisions in the collective interest of our residents.”