The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Crescent City Times.com
By Investigative Reporter, Linda Sutter – December 15, 2025
On December 12, 2025, Del Norte County Superior Court Judge McElfresh twice ordered Harbor District counsel Ryan Plotz to hand over the production of electronic records to this news reporter. The documents — produced only after the court’s direct instruction — included metadata and original electronic communications that reveal troubling internal conduct at the Crescent City Harbor District.
What those records revealed was not merely administrative irregularity, but a pattern of behavior raising serious concerns about Brown Act compliance, abuse of authority, targeting of a dissenting commissioner, and transparency in public contracting.
METADATA SHOWS AWARENESS OF SERIAL MEETING RISKS — AND HOW TO AVOID DETECTION
Rademaker is allowed to have 16 lines of the RingCentral App and telephone lines all paid for by the taxpayers on a monthly basis.
Among the records produced were internal messages in which Harbormaster Michael Rademaker explains how commissioners could communicate through email in ways that avoid a visible deliberation trail, specifically by blind copying (BCC) one another. In a text message Rademaker wrote,
“Kyler (from BBK law firm) writes me about an email you just sent, which included you and Gerhard Weber. Kyler was concerned about the risk of a serial meeting, but I explained all commissioners are sensitive to the limit. Kyler was insistent on an advisory email.”
This exchange demonstrates contemporaneous awareness of serial meeting prohibitions under the Brown Act and an effort to manage commissioner communications in ways that minimized public visibility. Rademaker also explained in another text to send emails blind copy to prevent detection of the commissioners writing to each other.
These same concerns were previously raised in a Brown Act brief prepared by Paul Boylan, who at the time served as legal counsel for this reporter. That matter was later settled by the District and dismissed without prejudice.
RINGCENTRAL METADATA SHOWS ONE-SIDED, CONTINUED CONTACT AFTER DIRECTIVE TO STOP
Earlier this year, Commissioner Annie Nehmer alerted fellow commissioners that Rademaker was falsifying documents and making inappropriate statements to her. Rather than placing meaningful restrictions on the Harbormaster, the board ostracized Nehmer and defended him.
Following that response, metadata shows Rademaker continued sending messages to Nehmer, sometimes every few days, despite being explicitly told not to communicate with her except with a third party present. Commissioner Nehmer did not respond to any of these messages.
The metadata preserves Rademaker’s own words. In one message, he wrote:
“Whatever difficulty we had is getting blown way out of proportion. Would you be open to a meeting with Kyler? I (emphasis on the ‘I’) feel like you and ‘I’ need to have a private conversation, albeit with Kyler or another person of your choice.”
He continued:
“In my perfect world, it would be great if you and “I” could issue a joint statement to dispel the rumors, and have more control over the situation than whatever external consultants report or gossip bloggers write. “ I” think we have more in common than we might realize.”
Rademaker then proposed mediation and direct involvement of Nehmer’s family:
“Do you think it would be useful to go over the latest draft of the attorney HR report together with your husband and perhaps our new attorney and see if we can reach an agreement on what we think is fair and accurate? It’s really important to “me” that way we keep it attorney client privileged.”
Commissioner Nehmer explicitly told Rademaker he was not supposed to be contacting her privately. Despite that directive, the messages from Rademaker continued, almost to the point of stalking. After several days with no response Rademaker stopped for a period of a couple of months but he engaged her one more time and she did respond on a particular issue but when she stopped. Rademaker then started texting her daily where she did not respond to any of his texts.
When I asked Annie Nehmer why she didn’t go to the board regarding these continued unwanted texts she stated, “the board won”t do anything because they believe Rademaker and not me.” it should be noted Annie Nehmer is a United States Veteran who receives no respect from the board majority, and where the board allows Rademaker and Sandy Moreno to attack her in open public forum on a regular basis.
METADATA RAISES UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS ABOUT WHICH CONTRACT WAS VOTED ON
The court-ordered metadata also revealed a significant and unresolved gap in the public record regarding Harbormaster Michael Rademaker’s employment contract.
According to the metadata, the only identifiable copy of the revised contract during the period it was scheduled for board consideration resided on Commissioner John Evans’ computer. That computer — and its contents — were not produced.
Because the revised contract was not transmitted to District counsel and the originating device was unavailable, the records do not establish which version of the contract was actually before the board at the time of the vote.
The metadata reflects a break in the chain of custody for the revised contract. With the only known copy residing on a single commissioner’s computer that was not produced, there is no way to independently verify what document the board reviewed or approved at the time of action.
IN THE MEANTIME theHarbor District received a Notice of Intent to Sue on October 31, 2025 the claims of this lawsuit was submitted to the Government Claims in Sacramento California and the suit involves violation of the First Amendment, where throughout the entire year where four women were interrupted during their public comments and threatened to be thrown out of the meetings by Gerhard Weber 10 times this year. One former story of a woman who was locked in the harbor facility shower facility by the harbor patrol and was continuously called a shower azi on their reports to the harbor district. Violations of California Public Records Requests, and ongoing violations of the Brown Act.
This case will be filed in the Federal Court.
