PSIA FILES
Proposed Resolution Email – Achey, Felsch & Lomen to PSIA-AASI Western Board (February 5, 2026)
Board members David Achey, Greg Felsch, and Blaine Lomen sent this mutual settlement proposal to the PSIA-AASI Western Board on February 5, 2026. They offered to withdraw their complaint to the Mammoth Lakes Sheriff's Department, drop pending matters with the District Attorney and Attorney General, and dismiss all standing complaints in exchange for the Board doing the same and reinstating their board positions. The email also states that the CEO had acknowledged that recording one of their conversations, and its use against them at a board meeting, was improper. The Board later characterized the email as an "extortion letter" under California Penal Code §518 — a characterization plaintiffs dispute, noting the email is structured as a standard mutual-release civil-settlement proposal rather than a fear-based demand.
2026 PSIA-AASI Western Region Board of Directors Candidates List
This official document lists 9 candidates competing for 4 board seats in the 2026 Western Region election. All candidates were confirmed as members in good standing. Notably, the document includes a Town Hall polling table showing staff-endorsed candidates Julie Brown, Neil Bussiere, and Paul Mundy receiving polling support from only 9 to 11 attendees. PSIA-AASI Western Ed Staff formally endorsed Paul Mundy and Sue Spain. The document notes these endorsements and polls don't determine eligibility or outcomes, though the complaint filed in Sacramento Superior Court alleges this process improperly influenced the election.
2026 PSIA-AASI Western Region Board of Directors Election Results (March 13, 2026)
This ElectionBuddy certified vote count shows the official results of the 2026 board election. Of 3,289 eligible voters, 524 ballots were cast (16%). For 4 vacancies, the certified winners were Barclay Moore (268 votes), Bryan Martel (252), Brent Boblitt (233), and Julie Brown (225). Alycia Glines finished 5th with 197 votes. Following the close of voting, PSIA-AASI issued disciplinary notices that suspended Moore, Martel, and Glines pending investigation; the announced election results then reflected next-place finishers Neil Bussiere (155) and Sue Spain (152) as filling the vacated seats. Plaintiffs allege the timing of the suspensions — issued after voting closed and after the publication deadline for results — was pretextual.
PSIA-AASI Notice of Disciplinary Proceedings – Barclay Moore (March 20, 2026)
This is the formal disciplinary notice sent to election top vote-getter Barclay Moore, signed by both National CEO Jeff Lifgren and Western CEO Marisa Cooper. It alleges a four-year pattern of harassment, misrepresentation as an examiner, and unauthorized use of member email addresses. A one-year suspension was recommended. Moore's membership was immediately temporarily suspended pending investigation, barring him from all events and AMS/Basecamp access. He was afforded 21 days to submit mitigating evidence. The notice also includes a non-retaliation clause that defines "publicly soliciting and/or campaigning members to support your cause or position against PSIA-AASI" as prohibited retaliation — a provision plaintiffs allege functionally silences a candidate during a contested election. The PSIA-AASI Code of Conduct and Procedures for Discipline of Members are attached — the same procedures plaintiffs allege were violated in issuing this notice.
Barclay Moore Email to Members Regarding Suspensions (March 20, 2026)
This is a personal email from election top vote-getter Barclay Moore, sent the day suspensions were issued, alerting fellow members that PSIA Western and National had just notified him, Bryan Martel, Alycia Glines, Dave Achey, and Jeff Connors of their suspension or termination. Moore characterized the action as the CEO attempting to nullify the election and reinstate candidates who didn't receive enough votes to win. He suggested members may need to organize legal help and call a member forum, and apologized for the situation. This email preceded the formal lawsuit by approximately one month.
Verified Complaint to the California Superior Court – Moore et al. v. PSIA Western Division (April 21, 2026)
Seven PSIA Western Division members — Moore, Martel, Glines, Achey, Felsch, Lomen, and Connors — filed this Verified Complaint in Sacramento Superior Court (Case No. 26CV009976) against PSIA-Western, CEO Marisa Cooper, and named directors Subramanian, Bussiere, Lee, Ochs, Ryerson, and Sheldon. The complaint brings claims both individually and derivatively on behalf of PSIA-Western under five counts: breach of fiduciary duty, violation of Cal. Corp. Code § 7341 (improper member discipline), violation of § 8330 (records-inspection rights), violation of § 7510(e) (failure to convene a properly petitioned special meeting), and declaratory and injunctive relief. Plaintiffs allege the disciplinary suspensions were issued after voting closed and after the results-publication deadline, in bad faith and to preserve current leadership's control. The complaint also alleges a pattern of disciplinary proceedings used against members who raise governance questions, citing the prior disciplinary proceedings against Tiffany Chiu as a precedent.
PSIA-AASI Western Special Member Meeting – Election Results (April 23, 2026)
Member-called special meeting under Cal. Corp. Code §§ 7510(e), 7511(c), 7222. 153 of 218 eligible voters (70%) cast ballots via ElectionBuddy. All nine resolutions passed with supermajorities (85–99%): Resolution 1 — stay the emergency suspensions and seat the certified election winners (97%); Resolution 2 — appoint an independent reviewer (99%); Resolution 3 — moratorium on seating non-winners (97%); Resolution 4 — censure and vote of no confidence (94%); and Resolutions 5.1–5.5 — votes to remove five sitting directors: Subramanian (91%), Caleb Lee (91%), Neil Bussiere (93%), Meghan Ochs (85%), and Henry Ryerson (87%). The corporation contests the procedural validity of the meeting and these resolutions; plaintiffs and the meeting organizers maintain the meeting complied with §§ 7510(e) and 7511(c).
April 23, 2026 – Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) Application
Seven PSIA-W members (Moore, Martel, Glines, et al.) filed an emergency lawsuit seeking to block the April 27 board seating. They alleged the March 20 suspensions were procedurally void under Corporations Code §7341, violated PSIA Bylaws §9.9, and were tainted by Neil Bussiere's undisclosed conflict of interest. They argued seating the disputed board would cause irreparable harm to their governance rights and professional livelihoods.
Minute Order – Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento – Moore et al. v. PSIA-AASI Western Division – April 24, 2026
Judge Julie G. Yap denied plaintiffs' request for a Temporary Restraining Order without hearing. The court's ruling addressed only the narrow question of whether plaintiffs had shown irreparable injury sufficient to support emergency TRO relief; it made no findings on the merits of the underlying lawsuit. Specifically, the court found that the evidence presented "does not show irreparable injury to Plaintiffs if a temporary restraining order is not granted," and that plaintiffs' assertion the new board would entrench wrongful governance was unsupported by sufficient factual basis "aside from conclusions and speculation" for purposes of that irreparable-injury showing. The court noted suspended members could still be seated if their disciplinary appeals succeed. The denial was without prejudice — plaintiffs may file a noticed motion for a preliminary injunction.
Plaintiffs' Reply to Defendants' Opposition to Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order
Plaintiffs' reply contends the suspensions were procedurally void under Cal. Corp. Code § 7341, which requires reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard before a member is suspended or expelled; plaintiffs argue notice was given only after the decision had effectively been made. They argue the harm is irreparable because a wrongfully seated board will immediately take governance actions difficult to undo. Plaintiffs reject the "extortion letter" characterization of the February 5 email, describing it as a routine mutual-release settlement proposal. They highlight the April 23 special member meeting, where 85–99% supermajorities approved every resolution supporting the plaintiffs' position, as evidence of broad member opposition to the current board's actions.
Declaration of Richard William Sheldon in Support of Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order
PSIA-W Board Secretary Richard Sheldon's sworn declaration in opposition to plaintiffs' TRO application. Sheldon attests that the organization followed its established confidentiality protocols and statutory notice requirements in the disciplinary process. He addresses each plaintiff individually, asserting specific conduct underlying their respective disciplinary notices. Among other things, Sheldon asserts that Blaine Lomen had been removed from Vice Chair on two prior occasions, characterizes the February 5 settlement proposal as an extortion attempt, and alleges that Lomen coordinated the member petition behind the scenes. Plaintiffs dispute each of these characterizations.
PSIA-AASI Western Region Official Announcement – April 25, 2026
Official PSIA-AASI Western Region member announcement following the TRO denial. The announcement states (a) the Court denied plaintiffs' TRO request; (b) the April 27 board meeting will proceed; (c) suspended members may still be seated if they prevail on appeal; and (d) the corporation's position that the April 23 member meeting did not follow proper notice procedures and its results are invalid. The announcement quotes the Court's "no factual basis … conclusions and speculation" language in support of these positions. See John Ellis's April 26 response (next item) for plaintiffs' rebuttal — specifically the argument that the Court's language addressed only the irreparable-injury showing and not the merits of the underlying claims.
April 26, 2026 – John Ellis Response to PSIA Email
Member John Ellis wrote to fellow members arguing the PSIA board's email was deliberately misleading. He explained line-by-line that the judge ruled only on the narrow procedural question of irreparable injury, not on the merits of the lawsuit, and that the board's repeated use of "no factual basis" misrepresented what the court actually found. Ellis contended the board could not have genuinely misunderstood the two-page ruling, and argued that the misleading communication itself was grounds for removing the board.
Declaration of Barclay Moore in Support of Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order
Plaintiff Barclay Moore's sworn declaration in support of the TRO application. Moore declares that he finished first in the PSIA-AASI Western Division board election held February 23 – March 13, 2026, campaigning on a platform of organizational reform that included calling for CEO Marisa Cooper's removal. CEO Cooper had confirmed Moore's eligibility in writing on February 10, 2026, before voting opened. On March 20 — after voting closed and after the bylaws' three-business-day results-publication deadline had passed — Moore received a Notice of Disciplinary Proceedings and was immediately suspended without prior notice, evidence disclosure, or opportunity to respond. The announced election results then reflected the disqualifications. Moore further declares that the member petition for a special meeting was invalidated by the board and replaced with a board-controlled forum.
Declaration of Bryan Martel in Support of Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order
Plaintiff Bryan Martel's sworn declaration in support of the TRO application. Martel declares that he finished second in the PSIA-AASI Western Division board election held February 23 – March 13, 2026, campaigning on a platform of organizational reform that included calling for CEO Marisa Cooper's removal. CEO Cooper had confirmed Martel's eligibility in writing on February 10, 2026, before voting opened. On March 20 — after voting closed and after the bylaws' three-business-day results-publication deadline had passed — Martel received a Notice of Disciplinary Proceedings and was immediately suspended without prior notice, evidence disclosure, or opportunity to respond. The announced election results then reflected the disqualifications. Martel further declares that the member petition for a special meeting was invalidated by the board and replaced with a board-controlled forum.
Declaration of Alycia Glines in Support of Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order
Plaintiff Alycia Glines' sworn declaration in support of the TRO application. Glines’ declares that she finished fifth in the PSIA-AASI Western Division board election held February 23 – March 13, 2026, campaigning on a platform of organizational reform that included calling for CEO Marisa Cooper's removal. CEO Cooper had confirmed Glines’ eligibility in writing on February 10, 2026, before voting opened. On March 20 — after voting closed and after the bylaws' three-business-day results-publication deadline had passed — Glines received a Notice of Disciplinary Proceedings and was immediately suspended without prior notice, evidence disclosure, or opportunity to respond. The announced election results then reflected the disqualifications. She also declares that PSIA denied her request to access the member contact list during her campaign. Glines further declares that the member petition for a special meeting was invalidated by the board and replaced with a board-controlled forum.
Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order
The corporation's opposition to plaintiffs' emergency TRO request. Defendants argue that (a) plaintiffs engaged in misconduct independent of the election, including breaches of confidentiality and what defendants characterize as extortion; (b) the disciplinary process complied with all applicable procedures; and (c) plaintiffs cannot show irreparable harm because suspended members who prevail on appeal will be seated for the remainder of their terms. Defendants conclude that plaintiffs cannot meet either the likelihood-of-success or irreparable-harm prongs required for a TRO. The court ultimately agreed on the irreparable-harm point without reaching the merits.
Tiffany Chiu – Formal Questions to the PSIA-AASI Western Board (April 27, 2026)
Elected director Tiffany Chiu submitted seven formal questions to the PSIA-AASI Western Board challenging her sudden disqualification from being seated. Key issues raised: the Board cited a "conflict of interest" based on a demand letter Chiu's counsel had sent, even though PSIA-AASI's outside counsel had previously addressed that same letter in an April 8, 2026 written communication without identifying it as disqualifying. Chiu's seven questions ask for on-the-record answers about the legal authority for the disqualification, the due-process basis, the consistency of its application to her vs. other directors, and the simultaneous request that she sign a code-of-conduct agreement alongside her disqualification notice.
PSIA Member Alison Monahan Proposed Path Forward to PSIA Lawyer Dan Stormer (May 7, 2026)
On May 7, 2026, PSIA-W member Alison Monahan emailed Dan Stormer of Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai LLP — litigation counsel for PSIA-W in Moore et al. v. PSIA-AASI Western Division (Sac. Sup. Ct. No. 26CV009976) — with a written set of demands and two proposed paths to resolve the ongoing dispute over post-April 27, 2026 board composition.
Background. Monahan served as the elected Secretary of the April 23, 2026 special meeting of the membership and personally tallied the member vote at that meeting. She disputes the Corporation's contention that the April 23 vote was invalid or miscounted, and disputes the legitimacy of the directors currently seated on the post-April 27, 2026 board.
The demands. The May 7 email asked Stormer for three things:
Written confirmation of the legal basis on which each currently-seated director claims office.
A corrective communication to the membership — sent through the same Mailchimp/member channel as the April 25, 2026 board email and with equivalent prominence — retracting (a) the April 25 characterizations of the Sacramento Superior Court's April 24, 2026 denial of the Moore TRO, (b) the "no legal power and results are invalid" framing attributed to the court, and (c) statements attributed to legal counsel at the May 6, 2026 member town hall.
A forward-looking commitment that no further corporate communications would characterize the April 23 meeting as invalid or its votes as miscounted absent a court order.
Two proposed resolution paths. Monahan offered two distinct options for resolving the underlying election dispute:
Honor both votes — the 2026 board election results and the April 23 special-meeting vote.
Hold a fresh, properly-noticed special meeting — one both sides agreed in advance to respect the outcome of.
Stormer's response. Stormer acknowledged receipt on May 7. On May 12, his substantive reply was a single sentence: "We will not be able to accede to your time constrainsts [sic]." The reply did not address the demand for a corrective email, did not confirm the basis on which each currently-seated director claims office, did not address the statements attributed to counsel at the May 6 town hall, and did not engage with either proposed resolution path.
PSIA Sues 3 Former Board Members
As of June 2026 PSIA filed suite against 3 of it’s own board members who publicly called the organization out for wrongdoing.
Alleging Extortion
In April 2025, someone secretly recorded then PSIA West board members Dave Achey, Greg Felsch, and Blane Lomen at a restaurant as they discussed board actions. This unauthorized recording was shared with other PSIA board members and CEO Marissa Cooper and then used against them.
On learning of the use of the recording against them, three men went to the Mammoth Lakes Sheriff's Department and complained that the CEO Marisa Cooper had illegally allowed them to be recorded without their permission. They demanded she reveal who made the recording.
According to the document, the Sheriff's Department called board members and specifically threatened the CEO with criminal charge, seizure of her personal property, and jail time if she didn't hand over the identity of the person who recorded them.
The cross-plaintiffs (the now PSIA board) argue this was all used as leverage, essentially saying "tell us who recorded us and wipe our records clean, or you could go to jail."
Whether the recording was actually illegal was somewhat beside the point. The now suing PSIA board members say the then three board members who were secretly recorded weaponized the criminal justice system to get what they wanted.
PSIA Verified Answers To Suit
This document is the official response filed by PSIA-AASI West and its board members to the lawsuit brought against them by Dave Achey, Greg Felsch, Blane Lomen , and several others including Barclay Moore and Bryan Martel.
One recurring argument is technical but important: they repeatedly note there is no legal entity simply called "PSIA", the proper name is "PSIA-AASI Western Region." They use this to push back on several of the plaintiffs' claims.
On the election dispute, defendants deny they manipulated results or wrongfully disqualified anyone. They say the suspended members' board seats are simply being held open pending the outcome of their disciplinary proceedings.
Notably, the defendants openly confirm their view that the February 5 "Proposed Resolution" email from Achey, Felsch, and Lomen was an extortion attempt.
The Affirmative Defenses
Beyond just denying the claims, the defendants raise 15 separate legal defenses, essentially arguing that even if some facts are true, the plaintiffs still can't win because they acted in bad faith and failed to use the organization's internal appeals process first.
Tax Form 990 – American Snowsports Education Association Inc. (fiscal year ending June 30, 2022)
ASEA Inc. (PSIA/AASI), a 501(c)(6) nonprofit based in Lakewood, CO, promotes ski and snowboard instruction standards. Total revenue was $2.87M, primarily from membership dues ($2.3M). Total expenses were $2.61M, yielding a $259K surplus. Total assets reached $8.92M with net assets of $6.28M. The organization employed 25 staff, with CEO Nicholas Herrin earning $186K. The 9-member board is unpaid. A related foundation (American Snowsports Ed Assoc Found) received $1.04M in cash transfers. Provided here as financial context for the broader governance dispute.
PSIA National TAX and Financing Summary
A summary document, prepared by snowprosengaged.com, of federal tax filing data for the American Snowsports Education Association (ASEA / PSIA-AASI National) drawn from IRS Form 990 filings via ProPublica's Nonprofit Explorer. Per the summary: salaries and overhead consistently account for 65–75% of total annual expenses. Salaries alone represent 50–60% of expenses, with executive compensation at ~11% and other wages at ~44%. Overhead and administrative costs account for 10–15%, while program services, including educational materials, national team support, and member communications, receive roughly 25–35% of the budget. Full details are available in Part IX of the organization's IRS Form 990 filings.
Bylaws of PSIA-AASI Western Division
This document governs the Professional Ski Instructors of America and American Association of Snowboard Instructors, Western Division — a California nonprofit covering California, Nevada, and Hawaii. It establishes rules for membership (categories, dues, voting rights), the Board of Directors, and elected officers. It also covers meeting procedures, bylaw amendments, financial oversight, and corporate records. The organization's mission is to certify and educate snowsport instructors and maintain teaching standards. Effective December 19, 2023. For readers focused on the current dispute, see particularly § 3 (member rights), § 9 (board composition and director removal/suspension), and the provisions governing special member meetings.
PSIA Western Division Leadership Industry Context
A commentary piece, prepared by snowprosengaged.com, situating the Moore v. PSIA-Western lawsuit within broader trends in the snowsports industry — including private equity consolidation, instructor wage stagnation, and related litigation against major resort operators (Vail Resorts, Alterra, Aspen Skiing Company). The piece argues that structural conflicts of interest, including board members' employment by major resort corporations, predispose credentialing bodies to favor industry interests over working instructors. This is an opinion/analysis document authored for this site, not a court filing or primary source.