Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Magistrate orders $1,830 abatement cost, halves prior fine in Bay County vacant-lot case

5418323 · July 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A Bay County special magistrate found a vacant lot at 2300 Douglas Avenue brought into compliance after county abatement and ordered the property owner to pay $1,830 in abatement costs with statutory interest; the magistrate reduced a previously assessed $700 fine by half.

A Bay County special magistrate on July 17 found that a vacant residential lot at 2300 Douglas Avenue was in compliance following county-contracted abatement and ordered the owner to pay abatement costs of $1,830 plus statutory interest, with the cost to be recorded as a lien in Bay County public records. The magistrate also reduced a previously assessed $700 fine by half.

The magistrate, Tiffany Sotto, opened the hearing after code enforcement investigator Tim Justice introduced photographs and a prior compliance order. Justice said the property had been the subject of an earlier hearing that found the owner noncompliant and that the county contracted to clean the lot; he testified that photographs from the January 8 compliance hearing showed derelict vehicles, tires and other debris and that the county-contracted cleanup cost was $1,830. Justice told the magistrate that notices were mailed and posted; certified mailings initially were returned as undeliverable until the owner later provided an updated address.

Property owner Patrick Campbell appeared and told the magistrate he had not received initial notices because an old or incorrect mailing address had been used; he acknowledged that the property had been used for storage of unused vehicles and apologized for the noncompliance. Campbell asked the magistrate to reduce the fine because he had not received prior notice.

Magistrate Sotto said she had photographic evidence showing the property in compliance on March 12 and accepted code enforcement’s recommendation to assess the abatement cost of $1,830 with statutory interest and a lien recording. She said she would reduce the earlier $700 fine by half to avoid imposing the full penalty and instructed the owner to update his mailing address with county offices so future notices reach him.

The magistrate closed the hearing after instructing the owner to stay in contact with Bay County Code Enforcement to complete payment and administrative steps.