Bay County magistrate orders compliance, fines and one finding of compliance across six code-enforcement cases

Panama City — Bay County Special Magistrate Tiffany Serta accepted enforcement recommendations June 12 following presentations by Bay County code-enforcement staff and building officials on six separate property cases, imposing deadlines and financial penalties in five matters and concluding one property is now in compliance.

Code-enforcement managers and county inspectors presented photographic evidence, previous orders and the inspection history for each address. The magistrate accepted staff recommendations in each case and set specific compliance timelines and fines where staff recommended them.

Why it matters: the orders create enforceable timelines and potential county liens on the listed parcels if owners do not meet the conditions set by Bay County code, chapter 17. Several properties were described as blighted or unsafe, and one property was found to be unrehabilitable and subject to demolition or full structural repair under permit.

Votes at a glance

- Case 20250435 — 8804 Freemar Avenue (Southport area): Code enforcement presented repeated inspections documenting overgrowth and a debris pile. Staff recommended the magistrate find a Bay County Code section 17-2 violation (overgrowth/yard debris), set a 10-day compliance deadline to remove debris and cut overgrowth, and impose an initial fine of $200 and a daily fine of $25 for up to 20 days if the owner does not comply. The magistrate accepted the recommendation. The case is also scheduled for a compliance hearing July 17 at 1 p.m. Central.

- Case 20243558 — 2604 Shoreline Avenue (Panama City): Inspectors described a blighted structure and roof damage. Bay County staff recommended the magistrate set a 30-day deadline for the owner to submit a detailed action plan, obtain required permits and begin repairs, and to impose an initial $200 fine and a $25 daily fine continuing until compliance; fines would become a lien if not paid. The magistrate accepted the recommendation. The case remains scheduled for a compliance hearing July 17 at 1 p.m. Central.

- Case 20243475 — 229 W. 17th Street (Lynn Haven): Inspectors and the deputy building official described two unsafe, unfit structures (a mobile home and an accessory structure) after photograph-based inspections and a property transfer in probate. Code enforcement recommended a 30-day period for the owner to either obtain a demolition permit and remove the structures or submit full building-permit applications and structural plans for repair; failure to comply would trigger a $1,000 fine that would become a lien. The magistrate accepted the recommendation.

- Case 20250468 — 1139 Fifth Street (Panama City): Staff said the site is a repeat violator with yard debris, derelict watercraft, derelict vehicles, appliances and other junk. Code enforcement recommended a five-day deadline to remove debris, all junk, appliances and derelict watercraft/vehicles (including the RV) and, if not complied with, assessment of a $50 daily fine for up to 25 days; the magistrate accepted the recommendation.

- Case 20250158 — 1826 Callahan Street (Panama City): Inspectors reported furniture, unscreened/unused personal property, junk, trash and yard debris. Staff recommended five days to bring the property into compliance by removing the listed items and properly screening personal property; if not complied with, the recommendation called for an initial $300 fine and a $100 daily fine for up to 25 days. The magistrate accepted the recommendation.

- Case 23-02599 — 8561 Fremont Road: This matter had previously been ordered; county staff reported the property was inspected April 29, 2025, and found to be in compliance with the January 2025 order. The magistrate accepted staff’s recommendation and closed that case as in compliance.

What inspectors said and owner responses

- Bay County investigators and code-enforcement staff presented photographs showing overgrowth, debris piles, derelict vehicles and structural deterioration at multiple addresses. Investigator Tim Justice and others described repeated notices and re-inspections, returned certified mail attempts and postings at properties and the county government center.

- At 2604 Shoreline Avenue, Brian Michael Baker, who identified himself as his mother’s caretaker and said he holds power of attorney, told the magistrate he had obtained contractor quotes ranging from about $49,000 to $135,000 and had an unsigned contract with Old Town Roofing; he said a church youth group planned to perform landscaping work by donation and that title issues (a former stepfather’s name remaining on the deed) had delayed permitting. "I immediately started getting quotes from different companies," Baker said, adding he was working with contractors and a financial advisor to resolve title and financing issues.

- At 229 W. 17th Street, Deputy Building Official Paul Bouchane described the mobile home and accessory structure as beyond rehabilitation, saying they would likely have to be removed and rebuilt.

Enforcement mechanics and next steps

- Across the compliance orders, code enforcement repeatedly directed owners to submit action plans with timeframes, obtain all required permits from Bay County Building Services, complete inspections, and notify the code-enforcement division of progress or delays. Several orders made clear that if a required permit expires or is canceled the county will consider that a default and restart the fine schedule.

- The magistrate set specific deadlines in each accepted recommendation (five, 10 or 30 days depending on the case). Where staff recommended fines, the magistrate accepted those fine schedules; staff said unpaid fines would be recorded as liens on real and personal property in Bay County.

Procedural notes

- In several cases staff reported certified mail had been returned unclaimed or remained in transit; in others, notices were delivered to attorneys, relatives or posted at the property and at the Bay County Government Center. Several matters remain scheduled for a July 17, 2025 compliance hearing at 1 p.m. Central.

Closing

The magistrate closed the docket at 10:12 a.m. after accepting the enforcement recommendations. Property owners subject to these orders must follow the timelines and filing requirements set by Bay County code enforcement to avoid fines and potential liens.