_{Photo by Paul Critz}

Linda Sutter didn’t take kindly to a proposed set of guidelines governing public comment during Crescent City Harbor District meetings.

Though the author of those guidelines, newly-elected commissioner Dan Schmidt, didn’t initially mention her by name, Sutter warned that any attempt to remove her from the building will result in a lawsuit.
“My opinions are my opinions,” she said Tuesday. “You don’t have to like them. But the first time you lay hands on me and escort me out of this building, I will own this building.”

Schmidt didn’t mention Sutter’s name in his introductory statement or in his proposal, but he referred to statements she made at the Board’s Dec 3 meeting after Community System Solutions CEO Mike Bahr introduced himself and his staff to the Board of Commissioners.

At that meeting, Sutter, whose bid for a seat on the Harbor District Board was unsuccessful, criticized Bahr for supporting former harbormaster Tim Petrick, erroneously stated that the harbor was recently awarded an $8 million federal grant without Community System Solutions’ help and took personal jabs at new CSS employee Josh Mims.

Sutter also stated that Petrick’s resignation was due to embezzlement, though Schmidt pointed out on Tuesday that no such charges were levied at the former harbormaster.

Schmidt said Sutter’s statements were outrageous and should not have been allowed.

“We have to confine public comments to the business of the harbor whether it’s something that’s in the jurisdiction of this district or something on the agenda,” Schmidt said. “This cannot become a major bitch session for anybody who’s pissed off about not winning an election or whatever it may be. That’s why we have to take a careful, but strong hand so we can guide ourselves to a more productive harbor commission.”

In a letter to his colleagues, Schmidt said he was offering his proposed guidelines to start a discussion about whether and under what circumstances the Board of Commissioners could expel someone “who engages in disruptive action, behavior or conduct” during their meetings.

He also referred to California State Senate Bill 1100, which took effect in December 2023. Under this law, governing bodies can adopt restrictions and regulations for public conduct during their meetings and provide a mechanism to restore order if they’ve gone off the rails.

According to Schmidt, under SB 1100, the person presiding over the meeting must warn the person to stop their disruptive behavior or they may face removal from the podium.

He even addressed Sutter directly.

“I was your champion for a long time,” Schmidt said. “I fought and spoke on your behalf. Not only generally, but in the campaign. I thought you were a vital force in this community and still are.”

In his proposal, Schmidt addressed limits on public comment, stating that he and his colleagues shouldn’t tolerate disruptive comments. He said it’s also improper for members of the public to disrupt a speaker. Schmidt asked that those who want to speak raise their hands and wait to be recognized by the presiding officer.

Schmidt also addressed examples of speech that’s not protected under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, including statements that incite panic, “fighting words” intended to provoke violence and defamation.

Schmidt gave an example of a resident, Branden Bieber, who was removed from a Del Norte County Board of Supervisors meeting last year for disruptive conduct.

According to District 1 Supervisor Darrin Short, who spoke before the CCHD Board on Tuesday, Bieber had exceeded the three minutes he was given to speak and refused to leave the podium.

Board President Gerhard Weber, who helped Schmidt write the proposed guidelines for public conduct during CCHD meetings, said SB 1100 is a reinterpretation of the Ralph M. Brown Act, California’s open meeting law. He also said he felt an environment of disruptive public meetings might discourage investors and others who could potentially be interested in working with the harbor.

“We understand that in order for this harbor to survive, we need investors to come here and make money in the harbor and allow us to make more money ourselves to break even,” he said. “If we have a chaotic environment, that could attract people who do not have the best of the harbor in mind. If I were an investor I would take my money and run as far and as fast as I could go. Whoever doesn’t positively criticize the harbor, for what it’s worth, you are doing more damage to the community than you think you are doing.”

Another frequent speaker, Sandy Moreno, said the concerns Schmidt brought up regarding Sutter’s statements could apply to her as well. Moreno said she took them personally.

Moreno asked for leniency for those who need a little more time to say their piece and who are passionate.

“I think you’re stifling dissent,” she said. “These meetings used to never have anybody here. You guys are leaders and you should have broad shoulders and you should be able to handle something like this and say, Linda please calm down, if Linda’s the issue. When I first read this I thought it was geared toward me.”

Mims read the definition of slander for Sutter, stating that he believed her statements were meant to damage his reputation.

“I consulted legal counsel and they’ve advised me to record all interactions with Ms. Sutter,” he said. “I highly advise this Board to start recording these meetings because she does cross that line on occasion.”

Noting that the Harbor District’s bylaws state that total public participation on any matter will be limited to 15 minutes, Weber then closed the public comment period.

Weber, who is from Austria, said he helped Schmidt craft his proposed bylaws concerning public comment. As an immigrant, he said the First Amendment is extremely meaningful to him, but a Harbor District meeting doesn’t allow for total free speech since he can set a time limit on how long a person can speak.

“All I’m going to say is if you are making statements that are libelous, that are defamatory, there is a recording of every meeting,” he said. “If you feel you’ve been wronged and you need me to address this in court, we have the data that will support your assertions and you can go ahead and make sure you’re not defamed.”

Weber and the new vice chair, Annie Nehmer, urged the public to read the proposed “Practical Guidelines for Managing Public Forums,” which was included in the Board’s Tuesday agenda packet and is posted online.