Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wert Trail Expansion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge negotiation, say notice was short for WERT Trail expansion
Summary
At the Feb. 2 Ephrata Borough Council work session, multiple residents said they received late notice about the WERT Trail expansion, raised concerns about property ownership, loss of off‑street parking and safety, and urged negotiation rather than litigation.
At a Feb. 2 Ephrata Borough Council work session residents whose homes border the proposed WERT Trail expansion urged the council to negotiate with property owners and improve outreach after they said they received a short timeline to respond to a deed notice.
Susan Vater, who said she lives near the proposed WERT extension area, told council the borough appears to prioritize financial considerations over people and “appears more inclined toward litigation rather than negotiation,” and urged officials to consider the impacts on homeowners and pursue negotiated solutions on residents’ behalf. Gina Burkholder thanked borough crews for clearing roughly 12 inches of snow and said safety on Locust Street — a main thoroughfare with limited on‑street parking — should be addressed, including consideration of an emergency‑route designation.
Several residents criticized the timing and form of notice about property transfers related to the trail. Bradley Vater said he supports the project but that residents received insufficient notice, including references to a deed form in borough communications. Adrin Vargas said he and his wife received notice on Jan. 9, 2026 with a Jan. 31, 2026 deadline to agree to the deed, and warned that the timeline limited homeowners’ ability to review options and raised concerns about the potential loss of off‑street parking; he suggested exploring additional on‑street parking to reduce impacts.
Michael Usner asked council to clarify ownership of the parcels through which the trail would pass. No formal response or council direction on the trail was recorded in the minutes; public comment was closed and later the borough announced an executive session to discuss potential litigation after adjournment. The public‑comment sections opened and closed twice during the work session.
The meeting minutes use both “Quick Claim Deed” and “Quit Claim Deed” in different places; the correct legal term is commonly written as “quitclaim deed.” The minutes do not record a formal council vote or decision on the trail expansion during the meeting.
