By Investigative Reporter, Linda Sutter – June 6, 2025

What do Commissioner John Evans and Commissioner Dan Schmidt have in common? One is a sworn Peace Officer at Pelican Bay State Prison. The other, a licensed attorney and officer of the court. Yet both appear to have abandoned the very laws they swore to uphold—specifically the Brown Act, the California Public Records Act (CPRA), and anti-discrimination statutes—by turning a blind eye to workplace harassment, public transparency, and procedural fairness within the Crescent City Harbor District.

Since their election, both Evans and Schmidt—who campaigned on promises of transparency and accountability—have become emblematic of everything they vowed to change. The board, under their watch, has repeatedly failed to comply with basic legal obligations. Most egregiously, they have enabled the ongoing harassment of the board’s only female Commissioner, Annie Nehmer, by an unremarkable yet increasingly powerful employee: Interim Harbormaster Michael Rademaker.

On June 4, 2025, Commissioner Nehmer filed a Verified Petition for Injunction and Temporary Restraining Order in Del Norte County Superior Court. The filing cites extensive violations of both the Brown Act and CPRA, as well as abuse of power and retaliatory harassment stemming from Nehmer’s efforts to fulfill her fiduciary duties.

Closed Session, Closed Accountability

At the heart of Nehmer’s complaint is the board’s May 28, 2025 meeting, during which they allegedly approved a five-year employment contract for Rademaker in closed session—without providing the public access to the final contract or allowing public comment beforehand. The contract had not undergone legal review, was not fiscally justified, and was based on outdated documents altered by Rademaker himself. Commissioner Evans, tasked with returning the final contract to legal counsel, failed to do so due to being on vacation—leaving the board to vote on a contract that had never been legally vetted or properly disclosed.

These actions directly violate Government Code § 54957.5, which mandates that documents distributed to the majority of a legislative body in connection with open session items must be made available to the public. The public was not only denied the right to review the document—they were denied the opportunity to even respond.

Financial Meltdown Ignored

A PowerPoint presented at the same meeting painted a grim picture of the District’s finances, warning of possible insolvency within 4 to 9 months. This aligns with financial warnings made months earlier by former finance officer Dave Negus. Still, the board rushed ahead with an unbudgeted, legally unreviewed five-year contract, offering no public cost analysis or fiscal sustainability plan.

Deleted Messages and Fabricated Records

In perhaps the most damning allegation, Nehmer provides evidence that Rademaker deleted communications between himself and other commissioners, then submitted falsified documents in response to a CPRA lawsuit. The so-called “metadata” file was not metadata at all—it was a selective, unauthenticated export of text, with key messages omitted. These omissions obstructed both public access and legal accountability.

According to RingCentral, only the system administrator—Rademaker himself—has access to full metadata logs, creating a direct conflict of interest and effectively blocking independent verification. This self-serving gatekeeping raises serious concerns about document tampering and obstruction of justice.

Unvetted Legal Counsel and Silent Complicity

Rademaker also introduced the District’s new legal counsel, Ryan Plotz, without disclosing his prior involvement as an expert witness in the controversial Fashion Blacksmith trial—a connection Commissioner Nehmer believes should have been transparently vetted. Commissioners Shepherd and Weber allegedly knew of this but chose to remain silent, leaving Nehmer, and the public, in the dark.

Harassment Disguised as Mediation

Included in the court documents is a three-page letter written by Rademaker to Commissioner Nehmer that is nothing short of a gaslighting manifesto. In it, he accuses her of perjury, criticizes her under oath statements, and belittles her concerns. He admits to deleting messages—then tries to excuse it as standard practice—before suggesting mediation as a solution, despite being the source of the misconduct.

Rademaker’s letter ends with a chilling attempt to reverse blame: “Do you really need to keep escalating this situation?” he writes, implying that his own behavior is somehow her fault. This tactic—commonly known as DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender)—is textbook harassment.

The Tragedy of the Complicit

The most disturbing part? The other commissioners let it happen. In open forum, Rademaker publicly disrespected Commissioner Nehmer, stating that he could not “gain her confidence” and that “four out of five commissioners are reasonable—but she is not.” This workplace hostility, combined with selective legal enforcement and manipulation of public records, paints a damning portrait of a board gone rogue.

Time for Judicial Oversight

The injunction now before the court details systemic failures by sworn public officials to abide by the very laws that govern them. The situation demands not only legal scrutiny, but also community outrage. When sworn Peace Officers and attorneys abandon accountability, it is not only a betrayal of public trust—it is a threat to democracy itself.

If the court does not intervene, the Crescent City Harbor District may soon become a case study in what happens when corruption is tolerated, whistleblowers are silenced, and transparency becomes just another broken campaign promise.

Commissioner Nehmer was forced into using her  own finances against the Harbor District and submitted the Injunction to Del NorCourt on June 4th, 2025. This is what an honest Commissioner does. It is worthy to note a complaint was lodged against Correctional Officer John Evans with the Director of Corrections Jeff MaComber,  and one will soon be lodged against Dan Schmidt with California Bar for several ethic violations.