Trail removal gets first reading

By Scott Unger • Of the News-Register • February 27, 2026

The Yamhill County Board of Commissioners held the first reading of an ordinance that will officially remove the Yamhelas Westsider trail from county planning documents at its meeting Thursday.

The board voted in January to eliminate the long-planned 15.25-mile trail from the county’s Transportation System Plan. The ordinance and findings will make the decision official when the second reading and a vote is held at a March 12 meeting.

Board Chair Kit Johnston read the ordinance during the meeting. The language describes the 14-year saga of the trail, from when it was added to the TSP in 2012 to the January vote to remove it.

The ordinance and accompanying 44 pages of findings heavily emphasize the county’s inability to meet standards of a Farm Impacts Test required for approval of non-farm uses in EFU-zoned land (Exclusive Farm Use). The test must show the trail doesn’t force a significant change in accepted farm practices or significantly increase the cost of those practices on surrounding farms, according to Oregon law.

“Thank you for the 14 years of retrospective of how the county has tried valiantly to make this happen, but it just couldn’t be done,” Commissioner Mary Starrett said after Johnston finished.

The findings were prepared by Wendie Kellington, an outside attorney contracted by the county who also represented farmers in opposition to the trail during several Land Use Board of Appeals hearings, according to county staff.

The findings detail procedural matters and the removal’s consistency with the county comprehensive plan and state planning goals.

From 2018 to 2020, several county decisions regarding an initial 2.8-mile section of the trail from Yamhill to Carlton were appealed to LUBA by farmers and subsequently remanded to the county because of insufficient evidence that the trail meets the impacts study.

A 2019 remand ruled the county must specifically address three pesticides farmers cited in the appeal, determine adequate setbacks for the trail to not interfere with farming and clarify what type of fencing would be used as a barrier to farmland. It also cited issues with fire concerns and parking.

“Despite the county’s repeated attempts over multiple years to establish the trail, Oregon state authorities, particularly LUBA, repeatedly and properly decided that the trail failed to meet the requirements of the nationally renowned Oregon and county farm protection land use planning program,” the findings state.

The last remand in 2020 reiterated the burden is on the county to demonstrate the trail will not force a significant change to farming.

“The county has not done so,” the ruling stated.

During recent planning commission and board hearings, several residents argued that remands are a higher authority returning a case to the original jurisdiction for further action, not an outright denial.

The findings repeatedly state the county was unable to meet the impacts test as a reason for the trail’s removal, describing the trail as “illusory.”

“Despite trying several times, over several years, the county was never able to demonstrate that the (trail) met applicable farm protection laws … and portions of it were on land that outright prohibited it, and the board finds it is unlikely to ever be able to meet those laws,” the findings state.

Following the 2020 LUBA remand, the board voted 2-1 in February 2021 to stop pursuing the trail and, with it, the impacts test.

The findings also cite a desire to end the negative discord among residents as an impetus for removal.

“The county has rationally decided that it no longer wishes to pursue this practically infeasible and divisive (trail), and to amend the TSP to remove it from the county’s TSP to stop the divisiveness it has spawned and the illusion that it can or will someday be developed,” the findings state.

There was no vote taken during the first reading Thursday. If the ordinance is approved at its second reading, it will take effect 90 days later, according to County Administrator Ken Huffer.