The "official" procedure is that the president presides but steps aside during the elections for president (and possibly the whole process) if she is running. It's pretty typical for the president to just run the whole meeting, including the elections, though. Your case is odd because the principal presided, but there was no actual vote. I can see choosing the principal as a supposedly neutral party, but in truth it should be a member of PTO who is chosen to preside, and that choice needs to be approved by the members. Were there people who were planning to run for office but were denied the chance? In that case it would be worth challenging the election, especially since no vote was held. However, if there were no other candidates, the principal (as presiding officer) may have simply acted on what he thought was an existing consensus. I'd be curious to know what you think.
- Craig
Links in this post: