We offer a general meeting monthly! To be honest all we get is the board and committee members! Now starting my term (Which I am sure I will either be loved or hated...) I plan on changing things! We will have open meetings everyother month!

Not sure if this is what your looking for also.
For our school district we have 4 schools primary, intermediate, middle, high schools. Each has their own EB for PTO, but then monthly the board members have a meeting with the superintendent to discuss things going on in the school. All 4 PTO's follow the same bylaws and if we were to vote on anything at the Coordinating Council Meeting our vote only counts as one whether we serve on more than one PTO. Which is possible if you had a child in each school and you were on each PTO board.

Our group and CrewChief's had a lot of similarity. Our general membership was the same - parent/guardians plus all teachers and staff. The 5 elected officer positions could not be held by an employee of our campus or anyone in a management position for the district. However the Principal, Vice Principal, and two teacher reps were voting members of the Board. Also, teachers/staff could hold any committee position.

Another thing we did that I liked was to have a parent rep from each grade. Structurally, these fell under the Volunteer Coordinator, but they were also Board members. Their responsibility was to report briefly on what each grade had coming up, such as field trips or testing where we might coordinate volunteers. The idea was that would help us stay in closer touch with the individual grades and not just those with parents who were key board members. Then, when help was needed, the volunteer coordinator worked with the grade reps who contacted the class parents to spread the word.

My last group operated in a similar manner. Our board consisted of four officers, two teacher reps and 10 -15 committee chairs depending on the year's projects. Only board members could vote.

The principal or his designee was to be present at every meeting. He did not have a vote but his opinions heavily influenced our decisions. He was given a spot in the New business section of the agenda every month.

Each "committee" had one vote. If there were co-chairs and both attended the meeting, we established which one would be the voting member for that meeting. If a committee chair couldn't attend, they could send one member of their committee to represent and vote on their behalf.

Also, each person had only one vote regardless of the number of positions they held on the board. It was common to have one person be an officer and maybe a chair on one or two committees but still have only one vote at the meeting.

Members were defined as any parent or guardian of an enrolled student and all staff members. Any member could run for an officer position or request to be appointed as a committee chairman.

We did not hold general membership meetings. The board met monthly and all members were invited to attend and participate in any discussions. While general members could not vote, we took any input seriously and tried to reflect that in our voting and the way we ran our daily business.

Monthly minutes were posted on the school's website. Copies were kept in the office and teacher workrooms for anyone to read.

Recently, the new president requested a PTO Page in the school's monthly newsletter rather than having the radom bits and articles spread throughout where ever there was space for them. I think that's working out really well for her and the team.

I agree with JHB that the voting base should be broad and represent the population. I liked having a 20 - 25 voting member board.

Good stuff.

As I said, it did seem odd at first. I went into it with the traditional thought that, "of course we need to have a general meeting each month!".

But I quickly learned that it was a good concept. It's actually more like a corporate model with the stockholders meeting annually, but the day to day business being transacted by a smaller group.

However, when I first became involved nothing was formalized or documented and the "Board" was the standard 4 or 5 officers plus the principal. I do believe if you give the power to the Board, it should be larger and better represent the population - hence our reformation of what constituted the Board. And, no matter how well intended, you really need an extra effort on communication. It shouldn't be perceived as a behind-doors-clique making secret decisions.