Our PTA is in the process of restructuring. We are creating new by-laws and new policies and procedures. At the end of last year I was elected President of the PTA - it was insisted by the retiring co-presidents that there should be a co-president. When no one else volunteered, they found a teacher to be my co-president. As the year progresses, it is becoming apparent that the teacher cannot be an objective participant in some of the decisions that are being made regarding the budget and programming. Both myself and the principal have talked with her raising the concern that being a teacher and PTA co-president is a conflict of interest. We have an executive committee in place that includes a number of vp's and a teacher liaison. I would very much appreciate advice and any precedent on this sensitive issue.

I agree, I don't think that a teacher is going to be able to make unbias decisions. The teachers do have their place but not as president or co president of the board. Have you checked to see what your by laws say? They may help you out a great deal.

What responsibilities/powers are given to the co-president in your by-laws?

Given that the teacher has, I presume, just one vote on the board, what actual harm is coming from her serving in her position -- other than the aggravation factor?

Precisely our problem - we have no current by-laws and are creating them as we go along. So far, during our executive committee meetings we have not formally voted on issues. Maybe we should make that a practice. Still, the problemn remains, because the teacher is a very strong personality, some of the members of the ec with children in her class are afraid to speak up with differing opinions, and thus, the aggravation factor...

Well, without by-laws there isn't going to be much you can do if she won't voluntarily resign. Even with by-laws, removing someone from a board is cumbersome. Per Robert's Rules of Order, the motion must be preceeded by an investigation by committee, a report to the board from that committee, resulting debate among board members with the co-president present, then a vote. The whole process is designed to ensure that the "defendant's" rights aren't trampled on and/or that he/she isn't steamrolled by a small group of members.

So, in the absence of workable by-laws, just remember that most bully's back down when they hit against consistent opposition.

Even if you are rewriting your bylaws, wouldn't the old ones still be in effect? Is there anything in your old bylaws that would help?

Just my 2¢