City Staff Seeks to Discontinue Circle K Lawsuit

Tallahassee’s city attorney is asking the city commission to discontinue its efforts to acquire by eminent domain property owned by Circle K Stores, Inc., in the Canopy development. The request is based on an update on the cost of a lawsuit.

The action was prompted by neighborhood residents who have consistently raised concerns about the location of the project so close to homes.

The issue will be discussed at the June 11, 2025, meeting.

Background

At its April 16, 2025, meeting, the city commission directed staff to initiate the steps necessary to acquire by eminent domain property owned by Circle K Stores, Inc., in the Canopy development. During the meeting, the commission was advised that the first step in the process – obtaining two appraisals of the subject property – would likely result in an expenditure in “the low thousands” of dollars.

After the meeting, staff asked two vendors to provide estimates of the cost to conduct an appraisal of the Circle K property. Both vendors estimated that the cost of appraising the property would be at least $30,000 and both indicated that additional costs (e.g., land planning experts) would be necessary for a complete evaluation, since the land is already permitted. It appears that the total cost for the two required appraisals would in fact be upwards of $75,000.  Because the commission’s decision was based on somewhat inaccurate information provided at the April meeting, staff is bringing this item back for further consideration.

At the April meeting, the commission also asked that an estimate of all the costs that would potentially be expended in connection with this proceeding be brought back to the commission for consideration. The law firm of Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson (NGN) represents the city in eminent domain matters. Based on its extensive experience in the area, NGN has indicated that the likely costs of proceeding with eminent domain in this matter could be as much as $375,000.

In addition, the city attorney sought guidance from NGN regarding public purpose and public necessity in the context of eminent domain proceedings. NGN has provided an analysis of the issue, noting that it is essential that a determination of public purpose be clearly identified and supported by competent, substantial evidence in any resolution to authorize eminent domain. NGN also suggests that proceeding in the absence of an articulated and supported public purpose and necessity could result in sanctions.

On April 30, the city attorney received correspondence from Erin Tilton, counsel for Circle K.  The letter states, “Absent valid public necessity, exercising the power of eminent domain is an abuse of the City’s power and a violation of Circle K’s constitutional rights.”  The letter warns that Circle K will defend itself to the fullest extent of the law and that the city and city commissioners may be subject to sanctions and personal liability.