With regard to item 2.6 in the Supplementary Report of the Standing Committee for 2000 -
(a) Was the approval of a grant of $811,000 in 2000 and $297,000 in 2001 for the Cathedral Restoration Project a result of a request from the Chapter of St Andrew's Cathedral and if not from whom?
(b) What is the total amount the Standing Committee of this Diocese appropriated (or approved for payment) to the Cathedral Restoration Project? Have any of these appropriations ever been discussed by the Synod?
(c) Were any vision or long term strategic planning documents for the Cathedral ministry ever received by the Standing Committee in support of these requests for appropriations (or approval)?
(d) What were the "major expected outcomes" for "Line item 13: Capital Projects" in the Explanatory Report of the Synod Estimates Ordinance 1999?
(e) Does the approval for the grants in item 2.6 for the Cathedral Restoration Fund satisfy any of the major expected outcomes listed in the Explanatory Report, and if so, which ones(s)?
(f) Are any funds remaining under line item 13 which could satisfy the unfulfilled "major expected outcomes"?
(g) Has the approved grant for 2000 yet been paid to the Cathedral Restoration Fund?
(h) If not, is it possible for the Synod by resolution to rescind the approval by the Standing Committee and seek a new allocation for this line item which would better reflect the expected major outcomes?
To which the President replied -
I am advised the answers are as follows -
(a) The request arose from a discussion between the Dean, the Archbishop, the CEO and Deputy CEO of the Secretariat. The subject of discussion was how to fund the continuation of the Cathedral restoration project. The Dean advised the group of the status of funding and confirmed that the Chapter was about to launch a new public appeal for funds. After consideration of a range of options for future funds and taking into account the urgency of the need (in order to maintain skilled tradesmen and project momentum) and the length of time before the next meetings of the Chapter and DEB, the decision was made to make a submission directly to Standing Committee to commit the funds in question to the Cathedral.
(b) In addition to the amounts of $811,000 and $297,000 referred to in paragraph 2.6 of the Standing Committee's Supplementary Report, an appropriation of $1.0 million was approved under the Cathedral Appeal Ordinance 1997. The Standing Committee and Archbishop-in-Council were not required to seek the Synod's approval to make those appropriations. They have been fully reported.
(c) A report was circulated to Standing Committee dealing with the funding strategy for the Cathedral Restoration Project. The report dealt with the options available to the Cathedral to find funds, the action being taken by the Cathedral, and identified the matters on which the money would be spent. The report did not review ministry or related matters pertaining to the Cathedral.
(d) The major expected outcomes were -
• funds will be provided for strategic land purchases and church development projects throughout the Diocese
• funds will be provided for strategic schools and other diocesan infrastructure
• a fund will be set up, to assist with Moore Theological College's master plan including a new library project.(e) Yes. The Cathedral Restoration project is regarded as an infrastructure project on the basis that the Cathedral could never fund from its own resources the restoration of its fabric and interior.
(f) Yes. The funds referred to in Line Item 13 for application by the Archbishop-in-Council have been fully applied. However other grants for capital purposes in line item 13 were made for Vision 2001 projects and a facilities master plan for Moore Theological College. Some or all of these funds could be used for other major expected outcomes.
(g) Yes. Part of the amount of $811,000 referred to in item 2.6 of the Standing Committee's Supplementary Report has been paid. The balance is to be paid in October 2000. The amount of $297,000 will be paid early in 2001.
(h) No. Under the Synod Estimates Ordinance 1999 and the Synod Appropriations and Allocations Ordinance 2000 the Archbishop-in-Council has power to approve the use of the relevant funds. The Synod could only change that approval by making an ordinance which received the Archbishop's assent.