By Nicole Montesano • Staff Writer • 

Berschauer withdraws demand for trail bridge engineering audit

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Click here for one-day access.

For all other subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please .



The only people to blame for the bridge not being completed are Berschauer herself and her campaign donors. In her short residence in Yamhill county she has already cost us dearly. What's the over/under on her trying to sell the trail lands to her donors?


Gee. I wonder if there might be any lasting impacts to costs for future county projects of any similar nature?

"Wait a minute. Perhaps she's right. Perhaps we've been wrong to blindly follow the engineering traditions and superstitions of past centuries. Maybe we builders should test these assumptions analytically, through experimentation and a "scientific method". Maybe this scientific method could be extended to other fields of learning: the natural sciences, art, architecture, navigation. Perhaps we could lead the way to a new age, an age of rebirth, a Renaissance!...Naaaaaahhh!"
- Commissioner Theodoric of York


Haha....reminds me that the next Red Cross blood drive is Thursday May 13 at the Mormon church on Baker creek road......give a pint! :)

Duck believer

"It is our sincere hope that common sense can prevail" Seems as though that's not been the case so far, and the future outlook is pretty bleak on that front. Common sense has left the building.


Common sense is there.....just out numbered 2 to 1....

Tom Hammer

Martin to Kulla 6/17/20 "we are 15 days from completion"
after records request, Kulla to Martin 12/28/20 "sharing staff emails is out of bounds for elected officials" transparency not OK?
Martin to Huffer, Sadlo, Boenisch 1/25/21 "approximately 10-days work left to complete"
Martin to ODOT 2/5/21 "project 75% complete"
Fairline report to Martin 3/23/21 "70 days to complete"
Phillip Higgins to 1/19/21 "open to a strategy session"

David S. Wall

A little historical background information is hereby presented.
In [2016] the railroad property was being discussed and I believed bought.

The Board of Commissioners at the time wanted the Yamhelas Trail to be an Economic Development project but, could not get Grant funding...So...One of the Commissioners came up with the idea to market the Yamhelas Trail as a "Transportation Project" and viola ODOT funding appeared.

[Taken from a previous article dated: Apr 23, 2021 By NICOLE MONTESANO Of the News-Register;

"They were essentially cheerleading the county on in this process, so it’s my feeling we should push back on this because they were complicit in this,” County Commissioner Lindsay Berschauer said.

“I don’t know that we are going to get out of repaying the grant altogether, but it’s my belief they are on the hook for it, too … I just feel like this is a horrible, horrible first offer and there’s no accountability from ODOT as to the role they played in this.”

Commission Chair Mary Starrett said she agreed.

Starrett said the county should tell ODOT to “sharpen your pencils and … let’s see if we can come to a more mutually agreeable offer.”]

ODOT relied on Yamhill County to pursue the Transportation project but,...the real intended aspect of the Yamhelas Trail was an Economic Development project.

Issue: Did Yamhill County "misrepresent" their intentions to ODOT to receive Grant funding?

Commissioner Starrett is the only Commissioner left on the BOC from [2016] and should have remembered this fact or maybe, she wasn't paying any attention to the details.

End Post #1 [There is more to come.]

David S. Wall

David S. Wall

Post #2

It must be remembered Commissioner Starrett opposed Yamhelas Westsider Trail (Trail) from the beginning and any issue concerning the Trail proceeding forward. She kept her promise to her supporters.

Along the way, the Grants started to pour in.

NO Commissioner made any attempt to discuss the details of the "obligations" which were attached to the contracts to wit, the Grants were based. Sure, the contracts were entered into the public record but, that was it.

How many people read the "Agenda Packet" for each Board of Commissioners (BOC) meeting?

Also along the way, Commissioner Kulla, a Trail supporter, was elected.

The plot thickens, now Commissioners Olson and Kulla are the majority of the BOC and it is full-steam ahead for the Trail and assorted perks, like the Bridges and or culverts.

Commissioner Starrett still beats the drum of non-support of the Trail staying consistently true and steadfast to her guns and supporters objecting to the expenditures for the Trail.

Again, "NO" Commissioner, that's right, none of them, ever publically discussed the details of the "obligations" contained in the contracts to wit, the Grants were based.

Question: Does the BOC have both ministerial and fiduciary duties to be completely forthcoming and transparent as to all the parameters of the Trail project?

Somewhere in the mix, the farmers began to raise objections to the Trail and several Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) were initiated and re-initiated.

End Post #2 [There is still more to come.]

David S. Wall

Tom Hammer

Wright told 2012 Commissioners farmers had no objections. False Wright told MWACT farmers had no objections to get a grant. false. David Wall history is a guess, about 50% correct.