By Scott Unger • Of the News-Register • 

Planners vote to remove trail from TSP

Only current online subscribers may access this article and/or our N-R e-editions.

One-day subscriptions available for just $3.

For all subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please

Comments

tagup

A few fingers on the scales?….. It’s property owned by all the citizens of the county …put it to a vote!

The Tea Smith

The LUBA remands do not mean the trail has to be taken off the plan

akeesey

An ethics hand-out before the meeting is insufficient, given the contentious issue and the tangled business and family interests of the commission members.

M. Isaac

The attorney is quoted as saying:

"Boenisch responded that planners were provided with written Oregon Government Ethic Commission guidelines prior to the meeting."

If they were given the law that lists the government ethics guidelines, that would seem to me to be sufficient.

Also, wouldn't the Planning Commission have known that they would be reviewing this issue several weeks before the hearing? If so, wouldn't each member of the commission responsible to research the ethics rules on their own both before taking the position and/or taking part in the hearing?

Otis

Planning Commission is corrupted....so this vote is corrupt.

manyhands

The Yamhill County Planning Commission’s Dec. 4 hearing on the Yamhelas Westsider Trail was a waste of time. It quickly became obvious these “public servants” had already made up their minds to get rid of this treasured public asset.

Asked if he’d ever served as petitioner to LUBA on the trail, Commissioner Mark Gaibler said he didn’t know. But a quick Google search showed: “Mark Gaibler has served as a petitioner in multiple cases before the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals concerning the Yamhelas Westsider Trail. He was one of several property owners and farmers along the proposed trail who filed appeals against Yamhill County’s actions related to the trail’s development.”

In 2020, the George family of hazelnut fame donated large sums to elect anti-trail activist Lindsay Berschauer county commissioner. In turn, Berschauer and fellow anti-trail commissioners Mary Starrett and Kit Johnston appointed Christy (George) Cooke to the planning commission. Rather than recuse herself at the hearing, George claimed her family’s donations to anti-trail commissioners and subsequent appointment by them would not influence her vote.

Commissioners Steven Belt and Lee Schrepel, owners of land adjacent to the trail, did recuse themselves. But they did not follow standard protocol of leaving the hearing. They not only remained seated, but offered comments throughout.

Commissioner Brett Veatch, a real estate agent specializing in agricultural land, reclined in his chair, closed his eyes and looked to be napping. Maybe he was dreaming of some land coming up for sale soon?

It was no surprise then when every participating commissioner voted to get rid of the trail.

Sadly, Mary and Kit will arrange the sale of this treasured public asset to people who already have so much and now will have more. It’s a classic case of the greedy catering to the rich at the expense of the poor.

  • Most viewed
  • Most commented
Web Design and Web Development by Buildable