Village at Sunriver - 300 Votes Shy for Approval

By
Real Estate Agent with Fred Real Estate Group

 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

KTVZ - Channel 21 - Your Central Oregon News Source

Oregonian

KBND News Talk 1110

SaveSunriver.org

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

close

This entry hasn't been re-blogged:

Re-Blogged By Re-Blogged At
Location:
Oregon Deschutes County Sunriver
Tags:
sunriver real estate
sunriver land
sunriver homes
sunriver condo
sunriver golf
crosswater

Post a Comment
Spam prevention
Spam prevention
Show All Comments
Ambassador
251,887
Jesse & Kathy Clifton
Jesse Clifton & Associates, REALTORS® - Fairbanks, AK
Retired
56% is a pretty decent turnout... for us at least.  It seems as though for certain local elections the Fairbanks electorate is pretty apathetic.  300 votes is a pretty narrow defeat.
Feb 19, 2008 06:31 PM #1
Rainmaker
337,635
Thesa Chambers
Fred Real Estate Group - Bend, OR
Principal Broker - Licensed in Oregon
Jesse & Kathy - 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. 
Feb 19, 2008 06:38 PM #2
Rainmaker
157,322
Sandra Cummings
William Raveis Real Estate - Guilford, CT
Real Estate Agent, Guilford Connecticut
Thesa - It is always a shame when homeowners do not excerise their right to vote and their voices are not heard.
Feb 19, 2008 10:23 PM #3
Rainmaker
720,762
Teri Eckholm
Boardman Realty - White Bear Lake, MN
REALTOR Serving Mpls/St Paul North & East Metro

Thesa--At least a major change for the community requires a community vote. It is the way it should be. Disappointing that the amount of residents necessary to approve it were apathetic or unable to vote. We have a similar development being considered and it will be decided by five people...The mayor and city council. That is the alternative to apathy.

Feb 20, 2008 12:33 AM #4
Rainmaker
59,096
Candy Henthorne
Results Realty - Spring, TX
Spring Texas Real Estate
Thesa - It is a shame Sunriver didn't get the required votes needed for the expansion and development.  Sometimes people just figure that the rest of the town will vote and simply do not bother.  Change is hard for smaller communities, it will probably pass next time around. 
Feb 20, 2008 01:09 AM #5
Rainer
333,799
Danny Thornton
R & D Art - Knoxville, TN
WordPress Guru
Thesa, people are always scared of change. I guess it is a part of humor nature. We had a developer come into our area and want to build a shopping center in the area and at first the homeowners hated the idea and thn when they heard how it would affect the subdivision in value, they jumped on the band wagon.
Feb 20, 2008 08:25 AM #6
Anonymous
Michael Gannahan

This information is wrong.  There was no problem with turnout.  There was no requirement for a 60% turnout to make the election valid.  Even if there were, about 75% of Sunriver owners voted in this election (3200 of 4100), hardly a case of voter apathy.

 What there was was a requirement for 60% voter approval, meaning 60% of the votes cast had to approve the measure.  This is common in homeowners association - some changes require 80% approval, other 60%, others a simple majority.  In fact, before the vote there was a pending lawsuit claiming that this particular issue should require 80% voter approval.

 Judging from the pro and against comments by owners before the election, most Sunriver owners believe change is needed.  The disagreement was on the scope of the change.  The opposition also artfully created doubts over the openess of negotiations and the integrity of the developer.

 If published surveys can be relied upon, there is indication that support for this change dwindled over time.  Another vote on essentially the same matter is unlikely to succeed as the opposition becomes more organized and people more aware of the issues.

 The next go around needs to correct the pitfalls of the last - a more clearly defined project, open rather than secret negotiations between the developer and SROA, plenty of opportunities for public comment before a final proposal is reached, replace a naive and incompetent Board with owners with experience to carry this forward, etc.  This can be done and will assure success the next time around.

Feb 20, 2008 01:26 PM #7
Post a Comment
Spam prevention
Show All Comments

What's the reason you're reporting this blog entry?

Are you sure you want to report this blog entry as spam?

Rainmaker
337,635

Thesa Chambers

Principal Broker - Licensed in Oregon
Ask me a question
*
*
*
*
Spam prevention

Additional Information