Cramer's trespass appeal approved

This article has been updated to correct information regarding Dave Bowman's appeal.

SANDPOINT — Bonner County resident Rick Cramer’s appeal has been approved by the board of county commissioners following a notice that he was trespassed from all county property in January.

On Jan. 26, Cramer was notified during a special business meeting of the Bonner County commissioners that he was being trespassed from all county property for a year after his disruption of previous business meetings and alleged threats that had been made to the county via email by another resident.

When Cramer was asked to leave, he refused, prompting county staff to call police. After still refusing to leave, Cramer was arrested by the Sandpoint Police, but was not officially booked into the jail.

Following two months of only being allowed to participate in meetings via Zoom, Cramer filed a 29-page appeal April 1 against the trespass notice, citing multiple reasons that it should be revoked.

“The underlying trespass by [Commissioner] Luke Omodt was flawed,” Daniel Sheckler, Cramer’s legal counsel, said. “The notice of trespass was flawed. This process is flawed … The action to trespass Mr. Cramer was arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion. It unconstitutionally violates Mr. Cramer’s constitutional rights.”

Sheckler began the appeal by contending the amount of time given for Cramer to appeal was insufficient. A copy of the official trespass notice, which provided Cramer with the chance to appeal, was sent only 10 days before the deadline to appeal. Because it was only sent via regular mail, Cramer did not receive the letter until March 25, eight days before his appeal deadline.

Additionally, counsel argued that the appellate procedure is inadequate as it does not refer to a county ordinance or state statute, it merely says to submit any appeals in writing.

“The written notice is vague,” argued Sheckler. “[The letter] is vague and insufficiently specific to constitutionally notify Richard Cramer of the factual basis for the decision. Richard Cramer demands a bill of particulars stating with specificity the conduct that was ‘regularly disruptive’ at business meetings, including when disruptions occurred and the nature of the disruptive conduct … The vague allegations violate his due process rights.”

Sheckler also listed multiple constitutional issues with the trespass notice, including the violation of Cramer’s First Amendment rights as well as an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder, which some believe allows governmental bodies to punish an individual for a perceived crime without first going through the trial process.

The appeal argued that Cramer has not been regularly disruptive at business meetings, and has only spoken out of turn a few times during multiple months of attending almost weekly.

In addition, Sheckler claimed that there is no evidence that Cramer has attempted “to harass or intimidate county staff from performing the functions and responsibilities of their job.” While another county resident, Dave Bowman — who was trespassed at the same time as Cramer — sent emails that many perceived as threatening toward county staff, Cramer maintains that he was not connected to that incident in any way and believes that he was unfairly lumped into the situation.

“Luke Omodt was alarmed by the email of Dave Bowman and lumped Mr. Cramer in with him wrongfully,” Sheckler said. “Chairman Omodt trespassed the two of them, and unreasonably trespassed Mr. Cramer.”

The appeal also stated that the board of commissioners has placed unreasonable and arbitrary standards on Cramer that are not applied to anyone else who attends the meetings.

“The BOCC has arbitrarily and capriciously selected Mr. Cramer for punishment,” the appeal read. “It has not held uniform standards for disruptions or treated most other disruptions similarly … A neutral observer would note that the disruptions are more frequently done by others, and to a greater extent than any disruption by Mr. Cramer. But he is one of two people who has been wrongly trespassed.”

Bonner County also does not have an ordinance authorizing the board, or chairman, to trespass individuals from future county meetings, the appeal said. According to county code, the chair is only permitted to “remove a person for unrecognized or disruptive comments at that meeting.”

“For the foregoing reasons, Mr. Cramer respectfully requests that the BOCC grant the appeal, reverse the decision to trespass Mr. Cramer and lift the trespass,” Sheckler said.

Cramer also issued a personal statement to the board asking for the trespass to be lifted.

“Life isn’t easy for any of us,” he began. “I think we all know how hard it is to tame our tongues.”

Cramer, quoting a passage from the Bible, told commissioners that he would strive to tame his tongue, wait his turn and acknowledge his duty to make comments only when recognized by the chair. However, he told Omodt that it was his duty as the chairman to treat Cramer fairly, not based on the contents of his speech or his viewpoints, allowing him equal access to public comment.

“Your duty is to not retaliate against citizens for a disruption, or unreasonably punish them beyond what the Constitution permits, even though the BOCC may remove a disruptive person from a meeting,” he added.

Cramer again contended that the board went too far, unfairly trespassing him and damaging his reputation in the community.

“I am not a violent person and I don’t pose a safety risk to any person,” he said. “Please acknowledge that I am not a dangerous person. Acknowledge that trespassing me was your mistake and lift the trespass.”

During a special meeting held April 4, the board unanimously voted to grant Cramer’s appeal, reversing the decision to trespass him for a year from county property.

“We hope he will conduct himself in a manner that will lend to civil debate,” Omodt said.

However, a motion put forth by Commissioner Asia Williams during the same meeting to also remove the trespass against Bowman died without a second. Due to a county error, his appeal was not recognized in the same timely manner that Cramer's was. Prior to his hearing date, Bowman's trespass from county property is set to remain in effect until January 2025.