Mar 26, 2025 By Zach Petroff 4 min read

Two Fayette County commissioners voted to use the power of the government to purchase 50 feet of private property for a section of the Sheepskin Trail in Springhill Township.

After unsuccessful attempts to negotiate an easement with property owner Brian Krupa, Commissioners Scott Dunn and Vincent Vicites voted to move forward with using eminent domain to acquire the needed land.

A statement released by the county public relations team indicated that the development of the Springhill portion of the trail required easements from several property owners along the route.

“So far, all but one of these easements have been successfully acquired through mutual agreements,” the statement read, calling the use of eminent domain “a last resort.”

Dunn said an agreement had been in place with all properties along Nilan Road in 2021, during a previous administration, except an easement for Krupa’s property which consisted of about 50 feet of abandoned rail.

He said commissioners have been in negotiations since March 2024 to tie up the final piece of land and had agreed to pay Krupa $4,300.

“We had been told at various stages by the property owner that the agreement was acceptable, only to never receive the signed paperwork,” he said.

According to the statement released by the commissioners, Krupa’s attorney listed 12 concerns about the agreement, “and suggested that formalizing the process through eminent domain might be the most effective way to address them.”

The county statement did not indicate the name of Krupa’s attorney.

Contacted Monday, Krupa said he did not want to comment on the matter until he spoke to his wife, state Rep. Charity Grimm Krupa.

Neither Krupa nor his wife returned calls; however, Grimm Krupa appeared to address the commissioners’ plan to invoke eminent domain in a post on her personal Facebook page.

“(C)ommissioners Vicites and Dunn have refused to make reasonable requests and amendments to the language of the easement,” her post read.

Grimm Krupa, who is a lawyer, also expressed concerns regarding the language in the proposed easement agreement. She called for clearer wording that specifies the exact location and width of the easement, writing that doing so would protect both the county and property owners.

Additionally, the post said she requested assurances that the county would indemnify her husband should someone be injured on his property while using the trail.

Other points of contention noted in the post were concerns about whether the land would revert to Krupa if the trail was no longer used, and why subsurface rights would be necessary. Subsurface rights refer to any resources below the land.

“If the goal is really a pedestrian walking trail, why on earth would they need subsurface rights?” she wrote. “With time, we’re going to learn what their real agenda is and I don’t believe it’s what the landowners think they’re signing up for.”

The state and federal government agencies only can use eminent domain when the land would be used specifically for public purposes, and the owner is fairly compensated.

Commissioner Dave Lohr, an opponent of spending on what he’s called “luxury” items such as trails, voted against invoking the powers of eminent domain.

“The county spending money on eminent domain is ridiculous. Eminent domain, when it was formed, was made to aid in life changing events, things that are necessary to life like hospitals, not for a bike trail,” he said Tuesday.

Dunn said during last week’s meeting that a plan to use the section in Springhill Township – and the necessary property easements – for the Sheepskin Trail had already been decided in 2019.

“We had already agreed to take all the property on the Sheepskin Trail, and to exclude one of the properties would be, in my mind, showing favor to one property owner,” Dunn said at Thursday’s commissioners’ meeting.

Lohr acknowledged that he had originally voted in favor of that in 2019. He said he’s since done more research and no longer can support the use of eminent domain.

“Why would I take someone’s property if I don’t think it’s a life changing event?” he asked.