[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6161160,"mediaKeyId","5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c","parentId",5444321,"title","Commission gives conditional go‑ahead for downtown marina talks; seeks financing answers","audioSeconds",5787,"startMs",10730000,"endMs",16517000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c&start=10730&end=16517","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c/thumbnail_10730000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6161160/Panama-City/Bay-County/Florida/Commission-gives-conditional-goahead-for-downtown-marina-talks-seeks-financing-answers","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6161160-77dee5752d428b713f7a171a1d981624/orig.mp4?Expires=1775362456&Signature=G9~7ADw~G3jLGhleGUt9m99y1EMIQUOXC32oaVPGLa6oxnzZxACvdPyHNng88frMDbcTOVWEX5oar3Cpemxm6m-uHwgrfgX0uZzIkYfweF5EQh1aC59wUCnw5UJqErB-veIZJnilbRNwyWz7bJ62ZC6Vv3FH8fVdXJ0DTCzfw7bff1ZcFu0ULTyfW9WiVdRN~DW4Z-Ow4UEYrG~XXxz8a~r5dh70hJHBHazsAJmESp2pfq0trw73ORnFy1cP19x1R8W4AA7HcwYvsTm0SnveJEySC4OOO3o5CBdKwlPcfDEVAhHOlWqyw0VUuf08Gxsj0u-bQVUVwa9PGzMIFuzo-w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Panama City, FL","date","2025-07-23T03:03:58.583Z","article","The City Commission agreed July 22 to give conditional direction to city staff and the downtown marina development team to continue negotiations on a long-term lease and financing path for the downtown marina site. The commission recorded unanimous support to pursue three key areas: an initial 55‑year ground-lease term (with automatic potential extensions tied to development triggers), investigation of conduit (revenue) financing for public infrastructure (wet slips and related upland public improvements), and authority to work with the developer team to define upland uses and a public-engagement process to test market feasibility.

Why this matters: The downtown marina project involves rebuilding two basins of wet slips and large upland and promenade improvements in the city\fore. Commission members and the development team said the basins alone do not generate enough revenue to cover rising construction and permitting costs; private equity sources require clear long-term rights and predictable financing to commit capital. The commission asked staff and city financial advisors to quickly determine whether conduit financing (bonds) can be structured so the city\roes not pledge general-tax revenues and that the city\u000bonding capacity is not impaired.

Developer presentation and concerns: Representatives of City Marina Partners, Gorman Marine and the construction and marina management teams presented a term sheet and timeline and described three critical items that the developer said were needed to proceed: a minimum lease term long enough to attract private equity (the team proposed 55 years, tied to the remaining term of a Saint Joe lease in the area), the ability to propose and develop upland uses (shops, restaurants, mixed-use) subject to the Saint Joe company\u000first-use rights, and access to conduit financing for the public improvements (wet slips, promenade, lighting, stormwater, parking).

City questions and next steps: Commissioners and staff pressed for a quick answer on financing feasibility and the expected engineering/permit timeline for the initial 50 slips. The developer said engineering and design for the basins could be delivered within roughly 60 days and projected that, if all approvals and permits proceed on schedule, the first piling for the initial 50‑slip phase could be set and the phase completed in mid‑2026. The commission emphasized it wanted a clear financing answer within a short, defined window (staff and the developer discussed 30–60 days to get initial feedback from bankers and bond counsel) before committing to any upland approvals or extended entitlements.

Public and procedural context: The downtown marina project is interwoven with the city's prior work and agreements in St. Andrews and an existing right-of-first-use arrangement with the Saint Joe company; those constraints shape allowable upland uses and height limits. The commission directed staff to work with bond counsel and the developer to determine whether conduit financing can be structured such that repayment relies on marina revenues and that the city\fredit and future bonding are not exposed. Commissioners asked staff to return with concrete answers on financing feasibility, revised schedules, and a proposed public-engagement plan for upland visioning and design.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City of Panama City Live Stream","oneSentenceSummary","The City Commission authorized staff July 22 to pursue three core items with the downtown marina development team — a 55‑year initial lease term, review of conduit financing to cover public infrastructure costs, and developer-led upland concept work — while demanding prompt bank and bond-counsel feedback on financing feasibility.","taxTitle","Panama City, Bay County, Florida","taxId",4834,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6161167,"Panama City adopts transportation impact fee ordinance but delays collection after business concerns",2382,837000,3219000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c&start=837&end=3219","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c/thumbnail_837000.jpg","/articles/6161167/Panama-City/Bay-County/Florida/Panama-City-adopts-transportation-impact-fee-ordinance-but-delays-collection-after-business-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6161167-f5e74912a9ae6c2bb4bd50e291412535/orig.mp4?Expires=1775362456&Signature=beepSOKHX-P70Y2BSSKIwVrOiNUGmApq8fdwI~q-ESg7tIXo37WVlo0JEMsYEeA7VUSvQ9GnIrt0GcUtwyf0K3yecOznq~woYWmCEawlOApCfA1zOQw0PmWQqYrkdCgd1EsNUavP~ZVUni8j2s9FgBeM8h6hE-U1XvG31h85xsf5oF7fz4LjrTbBDzbWHQ4To80NBUGYMLTA9cXKtya5LsgRWdXv8iYa6pUk-VSmT8eiFgtQOJmuL529YDZ0TDI41-r1FM-yNqkp46zzTMvdmpeJ0A7Vgofq6W7HZNdptxUeGXCtM84XymT3N0109oixNf6ZtBY~ACRn098jmtrePQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Panama City Commission on July 22 adopted an ordinance creating a transportation impact fee program but approved suspending fee collection while the city develops a mobility plan and considers exemptions. The final vote on ordinance No. 32-56 was 4-1.

The measure, which amends Chapter 113A of the Unified Land Development Code, replaces the prior proportionate fair share (concurrency) approach with a citywide impact fee that would be collected at building permit issuance. City Attorney Mike Burke and staff said the ordinance sets fees but allows the commission to delay collection by resolution while completing the mobility plan and publicly vetting exemptions.

Why it matters: Supporters said the fee creates a predictable way to fund road and multimodal improvements as growth occurs and avoids surprising developers late in the approval process. Opponents, including representatives of the Central Panhandle Association of Realtors and several commercial brokers, said current economic conditions make adding a new, potentially substantial up-front cost risky and urged more time to refine the structure and exemptions.

During public comment, Garrett Aune of the Central Panhandle Association of Realtors said his organization \"officially oppose[d] the transportation impact fee as it currently stands\" but asked for continued engagement. Commercial broker Jim Everett told commissioners the commercial and residential markets are fragile and urged postponement.

Commission debate centered on two competing goals: preserve the study the city has already paid for and avoid implementing a fee that would make housing and commercial projects less viable. Commissioner Granger moved to adopt the ordinance while suspending fee collection and requiring that any future implementation come back to the commission. The commission clarified that the ordinance, as drafted, would set the fees but would allow collection to be set to $0 until the commission acted; the motion directed staff to pursue a mobility plan, pursue exemptions, and return with public hearings before any collection.

The city attorney noted state law and established practice require a rational nexus between fees adopted and improvements funded and that fee adjustments would need public hearings and planning-board review. Staff and outside consultants (Kimley-Horn performed the fee study) told the commission the adopted fee schedule could be revisited and reduced (for example to 25% of the current numbers) through a public process before collection.

What the ordinance does and next steps: The ordinance formally creates the transportation impact fee program and adopts the impact fee study; by majority action the commission adopted it and at the same time accepted a suspension of collection so that the city can complete a mobility plan, vet exemptions and implementation zones, and conduct required planning-board and public hearings before any revenues are collected. The commission set an administrative process by which the commission could adopt a different collection percentage or area-by-area approach by resolution after public notice.

Outcome and vote: The motion to adopt the ordinance and suspend collection passed 4-1. Commissioner Hughes cast the only recorded “no” vote. The commission instructed staff to begin work on a mobility plan and to continue stakeholder outreach with builders, developers and community groups, and to bring back proposed collection percentages and geographic exemptions for further public hearings.

Remaining questions: Commissioners asked staff for clearer timelines for the mobility-plan work and for specific communications so builders and the public know how exemptions and phased collection would be handled. Staff said the planning-board and commission public hearing process for any future implementation would be required and publicly noticed.","The Panama City Commission voted 4-1 July 22 to adopt an ordinance creating a transportation impact fee program but directed staff not to collect fees for now, giving commissioners time to finish a mobility plan and review exemptions after public testimony and debate with developers and realtors.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6161152,"Commission approves Martin Theater change orders after cost questions; 4-1 vote",1926,13514000,15440000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c&start=13514&end=15440","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c/thumbnail_13514000.jpg","/articles/6161152/Panama-City/Bay-County/Florida/Commission-approves-Martin-Theater-change-orders-after-cost-questions-4-1-vote","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6161152-9b0d8e7196d9feacbe779fdabd8b04c6/orig.mp4?Expires=1775362456&Signature=S7sIO2kWdwZYVHLK5OMNWO-dctrjyiOQ1cKTRs6iprTLm9QL6ngLnHm0IM7gLsjruwEBrM9nj~8II-xFeC1t~NYXJusQp9QO6~F7wMQvoFtichjzVJzDT1cvGAeX39gnqSAEuqqFE~yd21hfEhjEkKTGSzJ96Z49ZbZkYTfXZ9jlL2bZd2B9IPX8iqkcs2ehMb1M3uEYoMrXqGoLpvPWc75m3jpKT8wgACbivwxSm4wuydJy2HnK0UudlIgqHespNcybGaZ6U03031hRWkd4RaLEQbsoMJj-Dq7SJmKPcnyKLti1XDDHMC-CUNR3y-4L6aanEZdPJvb469uI4WDFqA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City Commission approved change orders July 22 for the Martin Theater renovation that increase the contract sum by $252,775.13. The changes cover items in the FEMA‑eligible scope and other necessary construction adjustments, the city manager told commissioners. The contract is with Burke Construction.

Why it matters: The Martin Theater project is a high‑profile downtown restoration funded in part by FEMA and other sources. Commissioners debated several change-order items, including structural foundation work (helical piles), elevator type and a replacement fire curtain, which staff said could not be reused after inspections found burn marks. Commissioner Granger questioned why some items identified in the project's value‑engineering exercise had returned as increases; staff and contractor representatives said hidden conditions in an older building and tariff increases had driven additional cost.

Commissioner concerns and vote: Commissioner Granger said a thorough value‑engineering process should minimize such returns and asked for clearer documentation. City staff and Burke Construction explained the foundation issues and technical constraints that required deeper piles and additional grouting, and noted a tax‑exemption procurement arrangement the city will use to reduce final cost at project closeout. The motion to approve the change orders passed 4-1; one commissioner voted no.

Next steps: Because many of the change-order items are FEMA‑eligible, staff expect reimbursement through FEMA processes. Staff will provide commissioners with additional documentation on the geotechnical findings and value‑engineering clarifications as requested.

Vote: Motion passed 4-1.","The commission approved change orders increasing the project's stipulated sum by $252,775.13 to cover federally eligible FEMA scope items and other construction adjustments, after debate over value‑engineering decisions and the timing of some work; the vote was 4-1.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6161157,"Panama City backs signage pilot, delays a full smoking ban in parks and beaches",1126,3743000,4869000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c&start=3743&end=4869","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5444321-c14369cb4504419b4f2e44eb347d632c/thumbnail_3743000.jpg","/articles/6161157/Panama-City/Bay-County/Florida/Panama-City-backs-signage-pilot-delays-a-full-smoking-ban-in-parks-and-beaches","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6161157-ee0ab663ca8512a018245a80ceafd5fa/orig.mp4?Expires=1775362456&Signature=ag2D6w5bNiq~xQYE1cppaaXqMqYB8Gs275wel-fQAJzKvnJKNMic2soPNGbmLzkuq1yjqIHG1CxBB0h6jHIqEuGEQQSlD6gA5HbZuFFcTjBLdyAIkhfVXEtv~cnNvMKu62BWEZUtJKALce-MvbBFEpW74Hp2Krd~7cGAFFSFFwwg6ey15LFqZ5Wfct2wAmoj4mKxNwp62fW~4p-Nx90~t6BUQgQrMGttix-4EK~H1nh9jTf2oSNXxNrvk67RUD5BwZ1WaBit3VDBiRL7p~hBupoxJ6zMesvDv9utbOdFb0G46CTnfX0qJvK4RgUpCKheS~2e3UJst5bIvgnK-8ERCg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City Commission voted unanimously July 22 to implement a one‑year pilot establishing designated smoking zones with signage and cigarette receptacles at city parks and beaches, and to revisit a full smoking ordinance and enforcement options after the pilot. The commission did not adopt the proposed ordinance (No. 32-72) at final reading as originally drafted.

Background and legal context: Staff explained that state law (cited in the meeting as the statute governing municipal authority over smoking in beaches and parks) allows counties and municipalities to prohibit smoking in public beaches and parks and to regulate vapor-generating devices, but that an enforceable local restriction requires a municipal ordinance. Staff also warned that an ordinance without penalties can still create a misdemeanor under state law; commissioners expressed concern about criminalizing conduct and sparking confrontations.

Public input and concerns: Several speakers said enforcement would be problematic or that officers are not always present. Derek Thomas, a resident, said making violations misdemeanors could be a harsh legal outcome. Other residents asked how the ordinance would define parks and beaches and sought clarity about scope.

Commission action and rationale: Commissioners said they favored discouraging smoking near children and reducing litter from cigarette butts, but worried about enforcement, conflict and the city\u000budget. They amended staff's approach: instead of adopting a broad, enforceable ordinance with fines that could create misdemeanors, they directed staff to place designated smoking‑area signage and receptacles (special ash receptacles) at major parks and waterfronts, run a one‑year test period, and return in one year with data and a recommendation on whether enforcement (including fines or an ordinance) is needed. The motion passed 5-0.

What this means: For the coming year, the city will install signage and receptacles and monitor complaints and enforcement issues. Staff and commissioners said they want to limit conflict, focus on education and provide clear, visible options for disposing of cigarette waste. The commission retained the option of drafting and passing a formal ordinance with enforcement if the pilot shows it is necessary and supported by the community.","After public concerns about enforcement and unintended consequences, the City Commission on July 22 adopted a one‑year pilot to place designated smoking-area signage and receptacles in parks and beaches and scheduled a return to consider enforcement and potential ordinance adoption.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission gives conditional go‑ahead for downtown marina talks; seeks financing answers

Panama City adopts transportation impact fee ordinance but delays collection after business concerns

Commission approves Martin Theater change orders after cost questions; 4-1 vote

Panama City backs signage pilot, delays a full smoking ban in parks and beaches