The Professional Photographers of America (PPA) is Facing a Crisis of Leadership

The Professional Photographers of America (PPA) Council will hold a meeting in Grapevine, Texas where members will vote to recall the current board of directors citing concerns over leadership accountability, breaches of fiduciary duty, and failure to represent the interests of PPA members.

The PPA has more than 35,000 members. To understand how the PPA’s leadership works, or rather is supposed to work, it is important to distinguish between the PPA Board of Directors and the PPA Council. The PPA Board of Directors is a small group of, at the time of publication, 13 members. Each board member serves two-year terms and is elected to the position by the PPA Council. The PPA Council is a volunteer-based delegate body that meets once a year at Imaging USA, a conference and trade show operated by the PPA. According to the PPA’s own description, “Councilors handle Association business, which may include Bylaws and Adopted Procedure changes and the election of the PPA Board of Directors and/or its nominating Committee.”

There are a maximum of 150 elected Councilors and each state (including Washington DC and Canada) has a minimum of one Councilor and the remaining seats are distributed proportionally based on PPA’s membership.”

A Controversial Series of Elections

The controversy stems back to an election in October 2024 where Allison English Watkins, the current Vice President of the PPA, was voted as the next President of the organization and Pete Rezac, the current treasurer, was voted as Vice President. According to Watkins and photographer Lynn Cartia (who has been publishing blogs covering this situation since last year), the two of them, who ran unopposed, were blocked from taking their leadership positions by the Board.

Watkins maintains that the reason for this action was not made clear to her. Two weeks after she was elected, Watkins says she was called into a board meeting that was to take place on November 4 via WhatsApp, a platform that is meant only for unofficial conversations as she says the group is “trained to keep all official board issues and communication on the PPA Outlook email system.” When that WhatsApp chat continued into questions regarding Imaging USA, Watkins reminded the group that it was not the right place to hold that discussion.

“Just a reminder that WhatsApp is for casual banter and not official board business. Keep that on the email,” Watkins told the group.

A week later, Watkins says she received a phone call from the chair, Shekira Derryberry, that she had a letter signed by 10 Board members expressing their concern for her leadership.

“This is the first time I have heard any of this information and it comes as a complete shock. I ask what are the concerns. It is pointed out that my WhatsApp comment was taken offensively. I was also informed that board members were upset that I didn’t join in dinner and karaoke on Monday night, October 7th I eagerly ask for the letter so I can have more information. I am told I would have the letter the following day.”

The letter, which can be read in full here, states that the 10 board members — Terri Baskin, Mark Campbell, Shawon Davis, Shekira Derryberry, Makayla Harris, Phaneendra Gudapti, Larry Lourcey, Anjana Olson, Diana Robles, and Ronan Ryle — wanted to discuss “a change of leadership” and encouraged Watkins to step down. The Board claimed that since the position of president is elected by the Board, it retains the authority to make changes to said leadership without requiring council or outside approval.

On November 4, the Board held a discussion in which a lawyer was consulted and the claim that the previous election was “flawed” was presented. Watkins was not allowed to participate in the discussion and was asked to leave the room. The remaining members held another election in which Watkins was again the victor, but the motion was not approved. On November 11, the executive committee and the CEO/CFO of the PPA met with a lawyer to invalidate the results of the November 4 election and called for yet a third election.

On November 25, an online meeting was held and this time, the Board got the results it wanted. The election ousted Watkins and Rezac from their previously elected position, reinstated Mark Campbell as President, and placed Makayla Harris as Vice President. Rezac was not granted his previous position and instead, Larry Lourcey was voted to the position of treasurer.

In an email shared with PetaPixel, PPA council members say these series of moves contradict the spirit of PPA’s own Council Rules of Order (Page 3, Rule #3), which state:
”Non-members shall leave the room during voting where requested by the chair.” Additionally, “Council members and members-at-large are expressing concerns that this unprecedented restriction is an attempt to stifle transparency during a time of significant organizational upheaval. Many view this as an effort to control optics and suppress public scrutiny of the discussions surrounding the leadership recall.”

Watkins maintains that she was removed from her duly elected position in violation of the PPA’s guidelines, especially considering that several of the meetings were held in secret and the notes from these meetings were hidden from the PPA Council or removed.

“Let’s get right to the question everyone wants to know: What did Allison do to get removed from the Board of Directors? It’s a fair question and one I have spent many hours trying to figure out,” Watkins writes.

“I was removed from the board for making a comment on WhatsApp about following proper procedure. Or maybe I was removed because I didn’t attend dinner and Karaoke and instead worked on my assigned tasks. I guess it also could have been because I had a dissenting opinion during a discussion in the board room. I’m sure it is a combination of all three.”

Strangely, through all this, Mark Campbell published a “farewell salute” on PPA’s website, indicating that he won’t continue his tenure as president despite being named to the position again in the secret special election.

Recalling the Board

Due to the above, the PPA Council intends to hold an in-person meeting in Grapevine, Texas on February 3 — halfway through Imaging USA’s run in Dallas — to discuss multiple motions including a recall of the entire Board of Directors.

From the Council:

At a time when council members and the broader membership base are demanding greater transparency and clarification from leadership and staff, PPA’s decision to restrict access to the council meeting has raised alarm. For the first time in the organization’s history, the meeting will not be open to the general membership. Instead, attendance will be limited to active council members for the 2024-2027 term, PPA’s Board of Directors, past PPA Presidents, select staff, and invited volunteers.

This move contradicts the spirit of PPA’s own Council Rules of Order (Page 3, Rule #3), which state:
”Non-members shall leave the room during voting where requested by the chair.”
Council members and members-at-large are expressing concerns that this unprecedented restriction is an attempt to stifle transparency during a time of significant organizational upheaval. Many view this as an effort to control optics and suppress public scrutiny of the discussions surrounding the leadership recall.

The recall petition was submitted by more than 20% of the Council’s election authority, which is required by PPA bylaws to earn a vote, and cites three reasons for the motion. It calls the Board’s actions inconsistent with the PPA’s mission and values, its actions were a breach of fiduciary duty, and it failed to represent the interests of the membership in overturning the election results.

One major complaint is the decision of the Board to keep the special election behind closed doors.

“The exclusion of members from observing the council meeting not only undermines confidence but also raises significant questions about motivations within the leadership,” the Council says.

“Closing the meeting in this manner has a dual effect: it prevents members from holding leadership accountable through observation, and it also effectively blocks general members from running for a seat on the Board of Directors ‘from the floor,’ a right guaranteed in open council meetings. Many councilors see this as a tactic to restrict the number and diversity of candidates who can run for the board should the current board be recalled.”

Yesterday, 10 previous presidents of the PPA submitted a letter to the Board expressing similar concerns. While it stops short of endorsing the recall effort, the letter says the Board’s actions were “alarming,” that they lacked transparency, and that it was a “public relations catastrophe” for the PPA as an organization.

“While none of us has signed or endorsed Board recall petitions, we do question whether a Board that cannot properly conduct an uncontested officer election should be entrusted with governing a multimillion-dollar organization. We are listening to the discussions and will respect the Council’s decisions. However, the fundamental issue remains: PPA’s leadership must be experienced, transparent, and capable of making decisions in the best interest of the membership,” the letter reads.

“The officer election process of 2024 highlighted significant governance failures, including procedural violations, selective rule enforcement, and lack of transparency. Addressing these issues is essential to restore trust among PPA members and ensure fair and effective leadership practices in the future.”

The PPA did not respond to PetaPixel‘s request for comment and calls to the PPA at large as well as to Campbell and Derryberry directly went unanswered.

The PPA Council is strongly encouraging the general membership to appear “en masse” on the scheduled February 3 meeting to “demonstrate the membership’s commitment to transparency and accountability and send a clear signal to the leadership about how critical this meeting is to the future of the organization.”