By Linda Sutter, Investigative Reporter, – July 23, 2025

On July 23, 2025, during a public meeting of the Crescent City Harbor District, an astonishing revelation came to light: Commissioner Rick Shepherd disclosed that a letter requesting forgiveness of a $5 million USDA loan had been submitted—without full board approval.

Let that sink in. A multi-million-dollar federal loan—secured to benefit harbor operations and infrastructure—is now being pleaded away by a handful of individuals with no official vote, no public input, and no transparency. This reckless move, spearheaded by none other than Harbormaster Mike Rademaker and his confidant Rick Shepherd, involved gathering signatures from a few handpicked fishermen during a Fishermen’s Association meeting. The justification? That repaying the loan would allegedly devastate the local fishing industry.

This amateur backroom lobbying effort—falsely disguised as a legitimate consensus—does not reflect the collective voice of the Harbor District’s constituents. In fact, it may have just shot the District in the foot.

A Precedent in Failure

To put this in perspective, the Tri-Agency (a joint powers authority) spent 12 years trying to obtain forgiveness on a $290,000 USDA loan—and were denied. The USDA made it clear then: obligations are obligations.

Now Rademaker and Shepherd expect the federal government to forgive more than 17 times that amount, without a financial audit, without public hearings, and without legal review? The audacity is only matched by the negligence.

The Red Flags Are Waving

This move raises significant red flags that cannot be ignored:

1. Fiscal Instability
   The request signals to funding agencies that the Harbor District is fiscally unstable, unable to manage debt, and possibly mismanaged funds in the past.

2. Violation of Federal Grant Criteria
   Under 2 CFR §200.205, federal agencies are required to evaluate past performance, financial capacity, and the risk of misuse before awarding future grants. The loan forgiveness request effectively brands the District as a high-risk agency.

3. Jeopardizing Future Funding
   If this loan is forgiven—or even considered for forgiveness—the Harbor District could become ineligible for future federal or state grants, or worse, placed under heightened restrictions and oversight.

4. Lack of Transparency and Due Process
   No vote. No public discussion. No legal counsel involved. The act of submitting a request of this magnitude without board authorization is not just irresponsible—it’s potentially unlawful.

Who Pays the Price?

Should the USDA deny this forgiveness—the Harbor District’s reputation will suffer irreparable harm. Grant agencies, lenders, and government partners will see a pattern of desperation, not determination. They will see leadership unfit to manage millions in taxpayer-backed resources.

And while Rademaker sharpens his pen for another ill-conceived move, the people of Crescent City—the dock workers, the fishermen, the business owners—will be the ones paying the long-term cost of his shortsightedness.

Final Thoughts

This is not about a loan. This is about trust, accountability, and governance. It’s about ensuring that the Crescent City Harbor District is run with integrity—not impulse. And it’s about holding public officials like Rick Shepherd and an employee Rademaker to a standard that puts public interest above personal agenda.

It’s time the public demands answers—and consequences