County Eliminates Trail From TSP

By Scott Unger • Of the News-Register • October 3, 2025

Yamhill County moves to eliminate trail from transportation projects list. A late agenda addition concerning the future of the Yamhelas Westsider Trail drew backlash from residents at Thursday’s Yamhill County Board of Commissioners hearing.The board voted 2-1 (with Commissioner Bubba King opposed) to direct Planning Director Ken Friday to repeal an ordinance concerning the trail project and remove it from the county’s Transportation System Plan as a future project.

The Yamhelas Westsider Trail project has been discussed for over a decade. The approximately 17-mile pedestrian and bike trail would use county-owned land to follow a former Union Pacific rail line from Gaston to midway between McMinnville and Lafayette.

The controversial trail project faced opposition from area farmers and legal challenges but had the majority support of commissioners until 2021, when former Commissioner Lindsay Berschauer joined in opposition with Commissioner Mary Starrett.

The board voted in early 2021 not to pursue permits needed to begin constructing a section of the trail and the county repaid a $1.1 million Oregon Department of Transportation grant for a partially completed bridge on the trail. The county also later paid to have the partially built bridge deconstructed and removed.

The project has been largely dormant since, but Ordinance 880 — passed on Dec. 6, 2012, by Commissioners Leslie Lewis, Kathy George and Mary Stern — continues to identify it as a future county project.

Board Chair Kit Johnston repeatedly described Thursday’s vote as the first step in a community dialog about the trail’s removal from the TSP and said the public will have the opportunity to testify at a future planning commission hearing and a second hearing with the board.

Eight residents spoke against the removal, with some alleging the decision is politically motivated and others saying it doesn’t reflect broad community support for the trail.

Sonda Martin called the inclusion “sneaky” and said more notice should be given for a topic that is one of the most controversial of the past decade.

The item was added following initial agenda publication and no information on the item was included in the meeting packet.

“At best, this is some shady shenanigans,” she said. “Whatever the result, it won’t be forgotten by the voters next May.”

Resident Matt Dolphin alleged backdoor communications between commissioners and that Johnston’s comments insinuate the measure is destined to pass. He also noted the trail isn’t included in a recently approved 20-year parks plan.

“Why does it seem that every time the citizens of this county tune in this board is ignoring the needs of its citizens?” he asked. “I suspect that this wins you points politically and campaign contributions from a small group of wealthy business owners, but it certainly, certainly doesn’t serve the needs of the citizens of this county or future generations and it absolutely will not win you reelection.”

Berschauer also testified on the issue, stating that language in Ordinance 880 specifies that the trail would be a secondary use for light rail along the same path.

“The whole purpose of this project is for future light rail and the trail was sort of a secondary component to the goal of the larger project,” she said. “I think a lot of folks who have testified today are the same folks that were gaslighting former commissioners even way back in 2012.”

The ordinance states that the board “acknowledge future use of a 15.25-mile section of Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way between McMinnville and Gaston as a bicycle and hiking trail, and to provide for potential future use of the same right-of-way for commuter and/or freight rail.”

Berschauer disputed others’ criticism of Starrett and Johnston, saying they are looking out for the citizens financial interests.

“I think that the vast majority of Yamhill County taxpayers will support commissioners who stand up on principle, they stand in defense of taxpayers and are willing to tell the truth about what this project really is,” she said.

King said he was fine removing the light rail language but questioned removing the entire project due to potential impacts to a future regional water system that would partially use the trail.

“I agree with Commissioner Berschauer, nobody wants light rail here,” he said. “But the problem I have is the speediness of which we’re trying to do this.”

The removal of the trail won’t affect the county’s ability to use the right-of-way for utilities in the future as long as it retains rights, according to Friday.

Friday said removal of the trail from the TSP would mean the county is no longer pursuing the project and could allow other projects — such as widening main thoroughfares and adding additional pedestrian and bike lanes across the county — to move forward.

“We would be doing those instead of trying to develop the trail,” he said. “It kind of broadens our horizons for projects that we can do, instead of being very specific about a project,” Johnston added.

Johnston alluded to citizen comments about trying to find a middle ground on the trail and said the action represents that step.

“I think this is the middle ground of removing the specificity out of the TSP of this specific project because that will then allow us to broaden our scope on where we can build a safe path,” he said. “Whether it’s along (OR-47) from Yamhill to Carlton. But I think that will be part of the larger public discussion in this as we proceed forward.”

He noted that George Fox University recently announced a student project studying areas for bicycle and pedestrian pathways throughout the county and that the county has approximately $600,000 in dedicated ODOT funds for the development of bike and pedestrian trails that will grow to $1 million in the next four years.

The planning commission will hold a public hearing on the removal from the TSP at a later date.