evans, It may be easier to change the job description of your First VP having them be at the complete disposal of the president and sharing tasks.
Why the desire to go to co-presidents? Is it the workload? You could always delegate some of those daunting tasks to the 1st VP. From what I understand from people who have done this is that it only works under the very best circumstances. I would hate to put it in the bylaws, because it would open the gates for unsuspecting people in the years to come. We have a unit that is working with co-presidents but they admit they could not have done the job with any other person. It is not in their bylaws and it is not a position, just an agreement. If it were an elected position I would guess you would not no who the co was until the election.
Our by-laws simply say something generic like "any position or committee may be co-chaired". As far as our by-laws, it did not limit co-presidents to a single vote.
However, I would add my caution to Susieq04's. We tried it. (I was the one suggesting it!) I've read on the Forum that some have been very successful with it. However, it wasn't a situation I'd like to repeat. My co-president and I were (and still are) good friends. But the logistics of managing the decisions and tracking who was doing what was just too difficult. It put a lot of stress on our friendship, and I think we were less productive than a single person. It was difficult to make spontaneous decisions and to coordinate actions. I only suggested it initially because no one would accept the nomination for President, so I thought maybe we could split the job. It was more work trying to make the co-presidency work that it has been since doing it solo.
A word of caution on Co-Presidents. You must remember that there is only 1 vote for that position even though there are 2 people in the spot. Second a major factor ACCOUNTABILITY.. will the right hand know what the left hand is doing all the time, and accept the fact that they are just as responsible for whatever the other does.
Third-- Each Co must acknowledge that they are responsible and can be held accountable for what the other does or what ever contract he/she enters into.
This is one reason why many PTA units have drawn away from co's. Our unit has 1 presiden, a 1st,2nd and 3rd vp. I am the President and I keep my board up to date on everything. But the 2 main people I keep updated on daily about everything is my 1st VP and the Treasurer. If something should happen to me and I could not fulfill my role, I want them to know where we stand each day with everything. Both of them understand this and actually appreciate being kept up to date wither daily or at least 2-3 times a week about everything.
Back to Co's though, it would have to be worked out who will have the casting vote, who can sign contracts, and then you have to worry about later that there may be a power struggle between the two. (if not htese two then maybe the next set that come in later). This alone can destroy a unit. Your membership then gets involved in the dispute and it splits and then everyone is mad at everyone and there is no unity instead you may have 2 "teams" instead of 1 unit. i would not recommend CO's at all.
