At our small school, the principal and current PTO officers get together with a list, send out a flyer to all parents with either keep the same or add new ones and then we(the whole PTO body) vote at the next PTO meeting. Not a lot of takers but this year we should have a bit of competition finally!

If an organization allows nominations *only* through a nominating committee then they are trying to avoid potential embarrassment in an open meeting. This is not recommended in most organizations. The other extreme of not having a nominating committee at all, and depending on nominations from the floor, makes it difficult to get good candidates.

I recommend having a nominating committee with instructions to promote the offices, find candidates, confirm eligibility, and to gain concurrence to run. Generally a nominating committee only proposes (recommends) one slate of candidates - that is their purpose - to make a recommendation! However, some organizations allow their committee to forward all eligible candidates without recommending any in particular.

Even when using a nominating committee, there should be an opportunity for nominations from the floor. If the nominating committee has done a good job, there will probably be few nominations from the floor. One requirement imposed by some organizations when accepting nominations from the floor is that either the candidate must be present and agree to serve if elected, or must have submitted the same in writing.

A few other points. Nominations do not require seconds. A person can nominate herself. On a ballot vote, unless otherwise prohibited, you can vote (write in) for any eligible person, whether they have been nominated or not.

Very good question, writermom. My last team used a nominations committee appointed by the president. Here's what my bylaws say about it:

Section 6 - Candidate Slate
Prior to the April meeting, the President shall appoint a Nominations Committee of three to five non-officer members whose duty shall be to present a slate of candidates for the succeeding year. The goal of the Nominations Committee should be to actively seek a diverse representation of the membership to the organization.
Section 7 - Candidate Consent
The Nominations Committee must obtain the consent of each proposed candidate.
Section 8 - Slate Presentation
The slate of candidates shall be published in the school newsletter no less than 14 days but preferably 30 days prior to election.

I personally don't feel that their abitlity to attend a meeting to announce their nomination is proof of their commitment to the group. Since they aren't currently officers of your group, they may have other commitments that demand their attention. If they are involved parents, willing volunteers and overall your team feels that they would be a positive addition to the leadership team then I don't think their inability to attend one meeting should prevent them from being eligible.

We are writing bylaws, and the section on nominations and elections has turned out to be a hot one. I've read numerous sample bylaws and I'd like to get some input from anyone who cares to give it.

The current debate is nominations in a meeting only vs. nominations handled by a committee. Some on the bylaws committee want nominations to be accepted at two meetings only, with one person handling the nominations (as in keeping track of them). The upside is we would only need one person as opposed to a nominations committee since nominations would only be accepted at a public meeting. The downside: if someone who wants to run cannot attend, they are out of luck until next year. The pro nominations by meeting faction contends that we don't want leaders who would not come to a nomination meeting anyway--they aren't demonstrating their committment.

My understanding of the nominating committee is that it is made up of a balance of teachers and parents, whom people can contact if they want to run or know someone whom they think would be a good leader. You would want more than one person on this committee so one person does not have total control of the process. The group that is for this feels we could get more people interested in running if they did not have to attend a meeting in order to be nominated.

How do most of you do this? And what seems to work best?

The irony of the situation is that we are a small group with very few who attend meetings and serve in leadership positions but we have a decent turnout when we ask for volunteers for events. People like to help, no one really wants to be in charge. So it's not like people are banging down our doors to be on the board, but of course we are writing bylaws for future generations of the group andnot just our current situation.

Thank you in advance for any input you would like to give!