As you know from PPSLA’s July 20th e-flash, PPSLA brought a complaint to the Arizona Bar Association following adverse actions taken by our former attorney against our organization and its members.  The bar charge was brought in good faith and was based on legal opinion and advice.  In order to stand by our most important asset, our members, we must stand for the tenets of fair and ethical treatment while securing and maintaining the moral high ground.  Therefore, our duty to protect our organization and its members supersedes political considerations such as whether some unions using Mr. Napier might not understand. 
The Bar reviewed the complaint and elected to perform an investigation into Mr. Napier's conduct. 
On July 21, 2009, in what can only be perceived as a direct act of recrimination, PLEA wrote a letter to the Arizona Police Association (APA) president asserting that our bar charge was an attack on it and demanding that PPSLA be expelled (see attached letter).  Upon information and belief, PLEA circulated its letter to all of the APA member organizations excluding, of course, PPSLA, and began secretly lobbying other APA groups to side with it. 
 
Two days ago, PPSLA learned about PLEA's clandestine push to expel PPSLA from the APA.  PPSLA responded with a position paper which it sent to each of the APA directors including, of course, PLEA (see attached).  In that letter we explained that the APA guidelines do not permit the expulsion of a member organization by a vote of the directors and explained the basis for, and genesis of, the bar charge. 
On August 13, 2009, during an APA board meeting, PLEA offered its letter to the APA president, calling its letter a motion.  The "motion" was to have PPSLA expelled by a vote of directors.  On a vote of 12-0 with five abstentions, the APA directors "voted PPSLA out."  All but one of Mr. Napier’s client groups voted to support PLEA’s motion.  This vote was cast without discussion and over the request by at least one group to table the "motion" until an attorney could be consulted for explanation of the bylaws.   The request that a legal opinion be sought was ignored.  PPSLA asked all directors presently paying Mr. Napier to recuse themselves because of their extrinsic interest.  None did.  No attempt was made to amend the bylaws, there were no violations or misconduct alleged against PPSLA, and PPSLA was provided no opportunity to be heard.
Because of the APA bylaws, we believe we are still members of the APA and must decide how to proceed. We have no doubt that the APA acted in violation of its organizing documents and in violation of PPSLA's rights.  One course would be to force the APA to comply with its directives. 
Another possible course would be to sue the APA directors for negligence and bring trial board charges against the directors who voted to expel PPSLA for misconduct.  But these courses of action keep PPSLA within the APA ambit.   It is troubling that PLEA is dominating the APA and convening secret campaigns against fellow members.  >From what we see, PLEA has become Joe Arpaio's downtown wing, and its constant, incendiary attacks on Phoenix management make any place it inhabits inhospitable to reasonable, thoughtful people.  Perhaps the better course is to dissolve the bonds with the APA and free ourselves of the constraints imposed by that membership.  Recognizing that only about 10% of PLEA members voted to re-elect its current administration, perhaps its salvation lies within and the APA may yet escape its dominion which might render the APA relevant again.  But for now, what need have we of it?
We want to hear from you.  We have a lot of options and we value your opinions as we chart our way forward.  If you have any questions or comments, do not hesitate to contact PPSLA for the facts