Like you bec, learning the "legal" stuff. This looks like a good thing to me. Seems to me like it would be helpful in keeping individuals from pursuing their own person agenda when it comes to be involved int PTO. In other words, keeps the focus on what's best for the students and school as a whole. Wonder if GA has a law like this?????
In reply to JHB, who is very neutral and helpful by the way, yes that is it. I originally was handed SB2054 on paper (today) with parts underlined by a school official. There was no separation or explanation of school activity funds vs. support group, one of the sentences that was underlined was: "This bill requires that any school activity funds be turned over to a properly designated school official as school property; provided" and then the underlined stopped for a bit and went on. It was the words "turned over" that got me and the fact that we spoke up about issues with the director making unlawful decisions and control comments were made. Also, I want to make sure that I understand the law completely in case they misinterpret it (and that could be accidentally).
I value the advice given here and really need it.
Forgive me for asking, but someone said it is a law now... what line states that?? (trying to learn legal)
Let me add an edit/update here as folks may skim (especially since my copying the bill summary made this thread so long).
I think that bec811 is beyond the initial concern/question although this is still a good discussion topic.
Legislation is never easy to understand at first glance. I think the original concern was the misunderstanding that the PTO's funds would be classified as Activity Funds and thus put under the school's jurisdiction.
PTO funds (school support group funds) are still their own.
In what way do you think it might be hurtful? I dont understand your concerns. It seems like a good sound policy to me, from which many schools and parents could benefit. Accountability is always important in any group that raises money and just becasue the safeguards have been put in place by the powers that be, and not your own group, doesnt mean its a bad thing. I wonder what brought it all on, there must have been issues somewhere in the state, that brought on these rules.
Your funds will continue to be your own, deposited in your account, and spent as you wish (within your stated mission). You can't state your mission as supporting the school and then decide to spend the money on, for example, endangered animals.
Activity funds are all those moneys raised under the school's umbrella: cheerleaders, chess club, sales of theatre tickets for school performances, senior prom committee, fundraisers owned by the principal, after school clubs, etc. When you think about it - that's a lot of money each year and there's danger of accountability issues. You don't want teachers/sponsors/club presidents holding money or setting up bank accounts. Thus the state enforces responsibility on the schools to establish rules and act as trustee of the funds. (And no - it doesn't just go into one big pot - it's earmarked for the group that raised it.)
On the PTO funds (school support group funds), there's some additional accountability in that you need to coordinate fundraisers with the school and provide some year-end reporting. But it's still yours. Note - you do lose the ability for a school employee to be a treasurer or a signer on the account.
One point they do seem to be making is that concession sales by default belong to the school - with principal being able to authorize school support groups to run them. (I think this was an area the amendment tweaked.) I imagine this is especially geared towards big concessins, like football games.
