A former business manager for Fresno’s police union alleges she endured sexual harassment and was later fired in retaliation, according to a lawsuit filed this month.

The Fresno Police Officers Association denied the allegations in a statement to GV Wire.

City of Fresno Attorney Andrew Janz told GV Wire, “From the City’s perspective, we take these allegations very seriously and will follow all protocols (while) noting also that the City has not been named as a defendant.”

Anna Pine filed the lawsuit Jan. 22 in Fresno County Superior Court, seeking at least $1.95 million in damages. She is represented by Fresno attorney Brian Whelan.

Pine worked for the Fresno Police Officers Association from 2021 until her termination on Aug. 21, 2025.

The lawsuit accuses FPOA President Jeff La Blue of engaging Pine “in a romantic and graphic ‘sexting’ relationship” following her divorce.

“The termination was retaliatory and rooted in sex-based hostility and the systematic degradation of Plaintiff’s authority after she rejected (Jeff) La Blue’s advances, opposed misconduct, and sought HR guidance,” the lawsuit states.

La Blue remains a sergeant with the Fresno Police Department, though he is assigned full time to union duties.

Before joining the FPOA, Pine served as CEO of The Rotary Club of Fresno from 2005 to 2021.

FPOA Issues Statement

FPOA denied Pine’s allegations in a written statement.

“Pine was an at-will employee and was terminated for cause following documented performance and conduct issues,” the statement said. “The allegations in her lawsuit are contradicted by extensive documentation and are denied.”

The statement added that the FPOA uncovered additional evidence after Pine’s termination that it says further supports its position.

“Based on the evidence identified and acquired after Pine’s termination, the FPOA and La Blue will take all necessary actions to defend themselves and vindicate their rights,” the statement said. “The Association will not litigate this matter through the media and will not comment further.”

Whelan issued a rebuttal.

“The organization’s president is on tape blaming my client’s menstrual cycle, calling her a ‘f—— bitch,’ and saying he was going to fire her for doing her job. Afterward, they lied about her to cover it up. That is not a misunderstanding — it is blatant retaliation and sex discrimination, and my client will be vindicated in court,” Whelan said.

Allegations of Unwanted Advances, Discrimination

According to the lawsuit, La Blue engaged in repeated sexualized communications and conduct toward Pine, including explicit text messages, handwritten notes, verbal statements, and physical advances that Pine rejected.

When Pine attempted to disengage from the sexual dynamic, La Blue’s demeanor toward her “changed materially,” the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit further alleges that La Blue made sexually disparaging remarks about Pine to other employees.

La Blue used his foot to caress Pine’s leg during a business meeting in what Pine described as an unwanted and “unmistakably sexual” advance, the lawsuit alleges. Pine reported the alleged conduct to human resources, according to the filing.

The lawsuit alleges FPOA maintained an office recording system that captured audio and video. The lawsuit said Pine accessed the recordings to determine if La Blue had conversations about her with another employee.

In one such conversation, La Blue allegedly used derogatory language to describe Pine. La Blue also threatened to fire Pine for what the lawsuit interpreted as Pine “asserting authority, enforcing workplace standards, and pushing back against misconduct.”

When Pine was terminated, the lawsuit says she was offered $63,956 in severance. The filing questions the legality of confidentiality provisions that would have required Pine to remain silent, citing California’s Silence No More Act.

The lawsuit also alleges La Blue spread false rumors that Pine had stolen money from the FPOA and engaged in financial wrongdoing.

Those accusations are untrue, the lawsuit says.

“The timing makes clear they were weaponized as retaliation and pretext intended to smear Plaintiff’s reputation, justify the termination after the fact, and intimidate her into silence,” the lawsuit alleges.

The complaint lists seven causes of action, including hostile work environment, sex and gender discrimination, violation of the Silence No More Act, retaliation, wrongful termination, defamation, and waiting time penalties.

A court hearing has not yet been scheduled.