Christchurch homeowners will face a 7.35 percent rates increase from next week after city councillors voted to adopt the council’s Annual Plan.

The increase will apply from 1 July and comes as the council also approved funding towards the restoration of Christ Church Cathedral. Councillors Celeste Donovan, Yani Johanson and Andrei Moore voted against giving the cathedral $15 million, while Tyrone Fields abstained.

Councillors Aaron Keown, Johanson and Moore voted against the overall rates increase. Keown said the increase would hit residents already struggling with household costs.

The amount that we’re still increasing rates by, the inflation rate for New Zealand for the last year has been 3.1 percent,” Keown said. “The government were generous enough to put up pensioners’ incomes, but we will undo that today, because our rate increase will be two and a half times the rate of inflation.”

“It’s not what we spend on, it’s how we spend, and I just don’t think that we’ve cut the cloth enough again this year.” There’s people out there that just can’t afford it.” Yani Johanson had concerns about the cost of the city’s new stadium, and the lack of additional revenue being collected from those using it.

“People have loved it, people are going there, it’s doing exceptionally well in terms of attendance, but I still can’t understand why we haven’t done anything to raise additional revenue to offset the rates impact of the single biggest cost that we’re faced with.”

Johanson said he also opposed the use of surplus funding for Christ Church Cathedral. “We’re not seeing rates go towards things like housing, where we see an increase in need around homelessness and around unaffordability, and yet we’re giving money to some major organisations, and one in particular in the square, which I just don’t agree with.”

“When I look at this budget through an equity lens, it does still feel to me that there is some inequity that exists in it around addressing things in local communities that address the cost of living and address the frustration that people have versus the things that are really nice to do and nice to have for the central city.”

Councillor Jake McLellan defended the budget, saying it was misleading to compare household inflation with council costs.

“It’s extremely disappointing when members quote inflation figures that they know don’t pertain to how we procure,” McLellan said. “The household budget is not the same as a council construction budget.” McLellan also rejected the argument that cathedral funding had come at the expense of housing.

“It’s also disappointing when people put up false choices in terms of saying that we’re funding the cathedral instead of homelessness. That’s not true. There were no viable proposals to do more on social housing. We have a housing trust, we’ve capitalised it very well, and we’re working on other initiatives around emergency housing.”

Councillor Mark Peters said councillors had worked through the budget collectively and while not everyone agreed with every decision, the process had been democratic. “We’ve worked hard on this collectively as a group, and we may not all agree with all the decisions, but democracy rules, and we all had opportunity to put into this through the process,” Peters said.

On the cathedral and museum funding, Peters said the council’s money was not guaranteed unless other funding conditions were met.

“Today is the day that the baton passes to the cathedral and to the museum. They’ve got to go and do their homework, they’ve got to go and get the government to the table to get the matching grant.” Our money is not guaranteed. Our money may well go to debt reduction yet if they can’t get their agreements out of government. Our city loves the museum. Our city loves the cathedral, even though a lot of people have a problem with it. It is in the heart of our city, and having a broken heart in the middle of our square, we’ve got to find a way to get over that.”