A petition calling on Christchurch City Council to reverse its decision to contribute an extra $15 million of ratepayer money to the Christ Church Cathedral rebuild had gathered 18,650 signatures as of Wednesday morning RNZ.

The petition was organised by Christchurch resident James Pawson. It asks the council to withdraw the additional $15m and to revisit its 2025 rates rise of 7.35% RNZ.

The petition's text argues that committing $15m of ratepayer money to the cathedral "sends the wrong message to the people of Christchurch" RNZ. A Change.org petition titled "Stop Using Rate Payers' Money for Christ Church Cathedral Rebuild" states: "We must ensure that no more rate payers' money goes into rebuilding the Christ Church Cathedral unless there is clear public support for such" Change.org.

Christchurch City Council declined to comment, saying it had not yet formally received the petition RNZ.

Christ Church Cathedral Reinstatement Ltd chair Steve Wakefield acknowledged that people hold a range of views on the cathedral's future. He said the council's decision to contribute the extra funding depends on central government also chipping in RNZ.

Under the Local Government Act 2002, a formal petition needs signatures from 5% of enrolled electors in a council area to force a binding poll. This petition appears to be a community-organised effort rather than a formal one, but the near-19,000 signatures still carry political weight. By linking the cathedral funding to the 7.35% rates rise, Pawson has broadened the petition's appeal beyond those directly interested in the cathedral to ratepayers across the city.

The council's refusal to comment is a standard procedural response — until the petition is formally tabled, there is nothing it is required to act on. Once it is received, councillors will need to decide whether to debate the $15m contribution in a public meeting, refer it to staff for a report, or simply note it and move on.

Wakefield's comment is the more consequential thread. By confirming that the council's contribution depends on central government support, he has effectively placed the decision in the Crown's hands. If central government does not commit funding, the council's $15m pledge may be revisited regardless of what the petition demands. That dependency on Cabinet-level decisions also means the petition's audience is wider than Christchurch City Council. Any minister or official weighing whether to back the project will see a near-19,000-signature objection on the public record.

The tension between heritage restoration and ratepayer cost is familiar in post-quake Christchurch. But by pairing the cathedral funding with a rates rise well above inflation, the petition sharpens the political pressure on councillors who voted for the extra contribution. They may face questions not just about heritage or tourism benefits, but about the cost to households already dealing with a steep rates increase.

For now, the petition has momentum and a clear set of demands. The council has not formally engaged. The reinstatement company is pointing to central government. And the Crown's position on additional support for the cathedral rebuild is the key unknown.