Silverstar will have to look at other options for Village at Sunriver expansion and remodel. Although the majority of voters approved the sale of the 6 plus acres being sold to Silverstar the final tally was 300 votes shy of the 60% turn out that was needed to approve the sale. Silverstar already owns or has options for the 20 acres of the current mall. Many of the homeowners in Sunriver are disappointed, and many are rejoicing.
I have always said that change is one of the most difficult things for people to embrace, but it appears to me that Silverstar came pretty close to having the community support they needed. I have no idea what the next move for Silverstar will be, but I hope it is something to bring activity, beauty and support to this aging area of Sunriver.
Personally I would have liked to see a respected vote with enough people voting allow for a pass or fail. To loose an election by default of homeowners not voting is a sad statement to me. Do these people not care, did they not know what the issues were or did they simply forget to send in their ballots? No matter what the answer is, the fact is only 56% of the homeowners voted and no matter what the vote 60% were needed for approval of this project. edited to explain further - the majority of the votes approved this sale - however law required 60% voter turn out to approve - so because only 56% voted - the ballot failed - not because of lack of yes vote but because of the lack of 300 votes - if 300 more people had voted the land sale would have been approved.
It was brought to my attention that the first report of the number of votes was misunderstood or incorrectly reported - there was a large enough turn out for an approval if 300 more had voted in favor of the sale it would have passed. The vote required a 60% in favor and although the owners in favor out numbered those opposed they did not meet the 60% requirement. Oregon does have voting guidelines that require a percentage of votes, my apology is extended to any one I may of offended.
Other articles on this subject
strike out and itlaics were added on 2/26/08 when it was brought to my attention that this was incorrect - thank you Luis Bayol