In recent days, I have found myself reflecting upon the Bryce Courtney book The Power of One. The novel celebrates the impact that one person can have on the people around them despite the odds. My personal reflection is a more humble offering - and merely focused on the power of one vote: my vote around the council table at the City of Ballarat. Of late, much has been made of my apparent controlling influence on the votes of the city's eight other councillors when I was the mayor. A number of councillors have publicly shrivelled from their votes on the Gatekeeper's Cottage, some suggesting that "we shouldn't have done it". Their commentary submits themselves to roles as mere puppets or servants of a powerful master - devoid of individual thought or independence. The absurdity of this is of course laughable and those who choose to perpetrate the myth do no service to reality or to their community. Each vote at the table is, of course, as powerful as the one next to it - but no more. I have borne the brunt of headlines that would have you believe that the Gatekeeper's Cottage has blown its $100,000 budget by a factor of five. It hasn't. To pursue this argument is at best disingenuous. But it would seem the pen is indeed mightier than the sword. As George Orwell's 1984 so brutally puts it: "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past." However, unlike Orwell's bleak world of 1984, we have the benefit of our council records not being trashed, or re-written to a preferred outcome, just yet. We still have the advantage of looking at what history really tells us about how the Gatekeeper's project progressed and those who voted for it along the way. Critically, this was a project borne not of my imagination but from philanthropy and the desire of the Friends of the Botanic Gardens to find a home for its BotaniKids program. To simplify it, there were three stages. Stage One - the $100,000 relocation and refurbishment (meaning rainproof, basic services and secure) of the cottage to the gardens. This costing was buoyed by $15,000 for a later decision for additional items such as security and safety cameras. Cr Grant Tillett was very vocal in the meeting that night, ensuring it was clear that this money was not about the completion of the project - and was largely to make the cottage safe and watertight. This was part of the 2017-18 budget. The vote was unanimously carried. Stage Two - the $300,000 refurbishment to current standards including the kitchenette and painting. This stage finished over-budget by $1757 - was listed in the 2018-19 budget and again, unanimously agreed upon in council. Stage Three - $18,679 to make the cottage disability compliant and for walking paths linking to its surrounds. This stage is within the 2019-20 budget; once more, voted on unanimously by councillors. There was another $60,000 donated from the community, with $40,000 via the Friends of the Gardens and $5000 from the Rotary Club of Ballarat West. It is my understanding this project is sitting not five times over its budget, to more than $500,000, but $16,679 above budget. A very different picture to that adorning the headlines in which the revisionists desperately want to hold me solely accountable to a manufactured myth. The rigour of nine votes at a democratic table cannot be wiped from history. The Gatekeeper's Cottage is already delivering, reminding us that caring for heritage is more than just protecting old things - it's about tourism, jobs and our future. This has become a story about perception over reality. I stand publicly accused of a blind pursuit of "vanity projects", as Cr Amy Johnson would prefer to say. Under this new view, does Cr Des Hudson's pursual of Sebastopol projects equate to vanity - the regional soccer facility, sporting ground upgrades, Sebastopol Library upgrades? Or do they just represent what councillors are supposed to do - bring projects of need and hopefully "generational value" to our community? These projects were also fully supported by the councillors of the time, including myself. I'm proud to say I have brought investment on the community's behalf to the chamber: the Fernery development, basketball sports and events centre, the Gatekeeper's Cottage, Link Road, the Civic Hall revitalisation to name a few. If this is vanity, then my understanding of the word is indeed different to that of others. But if vanity means representing your community, being determined and working hard to make things happen, then I suppose I am vain. And proud of it, one vote at a time. Editor's note: Costs quoted in the story From $100,000 to half a million dollars: How the Gatekeeper Cottage costs kept growing (The Courier, August 1, 2020) are the council's own figures. In January 2017, a report councillors unanimously approved, indicated the cost would be "a maximum of $100,000 to relocate, refurbish and provide full services for the cottage". The total costs associated with the cottage were $501,546 over a three-year program, including $181,110 in 2017-18, $301,757 in 2018-19 and $18,679 in 2019-20.
CELEBRATION: The official opening of the Ballarat Botanical Gardens Gatekeepers Cottage. Picture: Lachlan Bence
In recent days, I have found myself reflecting upon the Bryce Courtney book The Power of One.
The novel celebrates the impact that one person can have on the people around them despite the odds.
My personal reflection is a more humble offering - and merely focused on the power of one vote: my vote around the council table at the City of Ballarat.
Of late, much has been made of my apparent controlling influence on the votes of the city's eight other councillors when I was the mayor.
A number of councillors have publicly shrivelled from their votes on the Gatekeeper's Cottage, some suggesting that "we shouldn't have done it".
Their commentary submits themselves to roles as mere puppets or servants of a powerful master - devoid of individual thought or independence.
The absurdity of this is of course laughable and those who choose to perpetrate the myth do no service to reality or to their community.
Each vote at the table is, of course, as powerful as the one next to it - but no more.
I have borne the brunt of headlines that would have you believe that the Gatekeeper's Cottage has blown its $100,000 budget by a factor of five. It hasn't.
To pursue this argument is at best disingenuous.
But it would seem the pen is indeed mightier than the sword.
As George Orwell's 1984 so brutally puts it: "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past."
However, unlike Orwell's bleak world of 1984, we have the benefit of our council records not being trashed, or re-written to a preferred outcome, just yet.
We still have the advantage of looking at what history really tells us about how the Gatekeeper's project progressed and those who voted for it along the way.
Critically, this was a project borne not of my imagination but from philanthropy and the desire of the Friends of the Botanic Gardens to find a home for its BotaniKids program.
To simplify it, there were three stages.
Stage One - the $100,000 relocation and refurbishment (meaning rainproof, basic services and secure) of the cottage to the gardens. This costing was buoyed by $15,000 for a later decision for additional items such as security and safety cameras. Cr Grant Tillett was very vocal in the meeting that night, ensuring it was clear that this money was not about the completion of the project - and was largely to make the cottage safe and watertight. This was part of the 2017-18 budget. The vote was unanimously carried.
Stage Two - the $300,000 refurbishment to current standards including the kitchenette and painting. This stage finished over-budget by $1757 - was listed in the 2018-19 budget and again, unanimously agreed upon in council.
Stage Three - $18,679 to make the cottage disability compliant and for walking paths linking to its surrounds. This stage is within the 2019-20 budget; once more, voted on unanimously by councillors.
There was another $60,000 donated from the community, with $40,000 via the Friends of the Gardens and $5000 from the Rotary Club of Ballarat West.
It is my understanding this project is sitting not five times over its budget, to more than $500,000, but $16,679 above budget.
A very different picture to that adorning the headlines in which the revisionists desperately want to hold me solely accountable to a manufactured myth.
The rigour of nine votes at a democratic table cannot be wiped from history.
The Gatekeeper's Cottage is already delivering, reminding us that caring for heritage is more than just protecting old things - it's about tourism, jobs and our future.
This has become a story about perception over reality.
I stand publicly accused of a blind pursuit of "vanity projects", as Cr Amy Johnson would prefer to say.
Under this new view, does Cr Des Hudson's pursual of Sebastopol projects equate to vanity - the regional soccer facility, sporting ground upgrades, Sebastopol Library upgrades?
Or do they just represent what councillors are supposed to do - bring projects of need and hopefully "generational value" to our community?
These projects were also fully supported by the councillors of the time, including myself.
I'm proud to say I have brought investment on the community's behalf to the chamber: the Fernery development, basketball sports and events centre, the Gatekeeper's Cottage, Link Road, the Civic Hall revitalisation to name a few.
If this is vanity, then my understanding of the word is indeed different to that of others.
But if vanity means representing your community, being determined and working hard to make things happen, then I suppose I am vain.
And proud of it, one vote at a time.
Editor's note: Costs quoted in the story From $100,000 to half a million dollars: How the Gatekeeper Cottage costs kept growing (The Courier, August 1, 2020) are the council's own figures. In January 2017, a report councillors unanimously approved, indicated the cost would be "a maximum of $100,000 to relocate, refurbish and provide full services for the cottage". The total costs associated with the cottage were $501,546 over a three-year program, including $181,110 in 2017-18, $301,757 in 2018-19 and $18,679 in 2019-20.
