I'm with you -- we should welcome anyone willing to devote the time and energy it takes to be an officer. Telling people we really want help and then telling them they have to pay (dues) for the privilege has always seemed like a contradictory message. But I understand, a lot of groups have that bylaw.

In your specific case, you're right that if they bylaw doesn't state a specific time period, you can't prevent a person from paying dues at the end of the year and then running for office. The situation you describe sounds more personal than based on concern for the rules, and that's unfortunate.

Good luck -- I hope you're able to work this out.

Craig

Hi there,

I am the current PTO President and we are in our election season for the next school year. The question has come up where a potential candidate is interested in serving as a PTO officer for the following school year. Our bylaws state that in order to serve as a PTO Officer you must have paid dues and be a voting member .

I get that that part of our bylaws and have no argument against that. What's question is that if we should allow the candidate to join and pay the PTO dues in order to be considered for the ballot.

Some say no the candidate had plenty of opportunities throughout the school year to join the PTO and now that it is the end of the year they should not be allowed. Others are saying we should allow them to pay their dues and then be added to the ballot. Our bylaws do state you must be a dues paying member in order to serve as an officer but it does not state a specific timeline of when someone is to have joined the PTO in order to serve.

From a volunteer perspective and with the challenges many PTO's face with not having enough people willing to serve. Why would we want to deny a parent the opportunity to be a PTO officer if they would like to be one and potentially they could add value to the organization.

I feel if we are going to indicate they cannot be considered to serve as an officer because they did not join within a certain time frame then our bylaws should state otherwise. Am I incorrect to think this... please advise.