Hi kmamom -

Question: who's going to be president next year?

Tim

ok, so I'm not the fundraising chair but I am the one she met with. We both know she's gone nuts and you need to step in and take over. From one control freak to another (after all I tell you who to call and where to get your pizza from)it's time to flex some muscle!!! It would be my pleasure to do it for you

This whole thing has just taken a really negative turn. Before it was just aggravating and annoying, after today it's become somewhat alarming to me (I know--the drama of PTO politics)!

Basically she's created a self-fulfilling prophecy: she claims I'm a control freak and inappropriately do things --yet it's her actions (or lack thereof)that force me into doing the things I do. If I don't take action and force her hand potential disasters are bound to happen. We could call a hundred meetings with her, have lucid conversations where when we leave we're all in agreeance then she'll act as though we never said what we did to her! :confused: Here's a good example--we have a general meeting. A bone of contention is raised. We put it to vote--do we or don't we? The members present unaminously vote we don't. Days later the fundraising chair is meeting with people (officers included) making decisions as though that vote held no weight because she's right and they were all wrong! We had an executive board vote about the fundraiser the other night--again we all vote NO except her. The next day she's on the phone talking as though she's still going to fight for what she thinks is the right thing to do. I'm like, "It's OVER--we voted--remember? Let it go." And her response is, "Well, that's between those guys." :eek: I almost screamed. Then I find myself trying to reason with someone when it's apparent they aren't open to reason. Finally I did snap and when she was talking about things that are in the contract as though they weren't. I asked in a not so nice tone, "Did you even read the contract?" I got an offended yes, and I was like,"Then how in God's name could you not see clause G and H? It's right there that we can't do that!" Then she tried to argue around it!!!

Daddio--thanks for the tips--but the biggest bummer is how I tried doing all those things, but to no avail. It's become glaringly obvious that she's been playing people against one another--unless you think to follow up a conversation you're led to believe that someone said something they didn't or holds the same opinion as her when they don't. Even though I was figuring this out, I got confirmation today. I'd ask and ask for information, notes etcetera only to be put off--our schedules conflict, and she knew ultimately I'd forget or would be unwilling to have the confrontation to keep the peace. It's really disappointing to me--I feel I'm usually a good judge of character, and I totally misread this one. In retrospect ALL the warning signs were there, but I saw only what I wanted to see.

Don't think canning her @ss wasn't at the top of my list today--because it was. But this is our last event of the year and all chair's terms are up at the end of this school year. Rather than give her the opportunity for more drama, someone else will be taking her position, if I have to hold a gun to their head to get them to volunteer for it! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Our PTA is infamous for having the SAME people chair the SAME events for literaly YEARS in some cases--complete with one being "handed down" to an adult child! With our group we wanted to get away from that, so we put the one school-year in our bylaws, which of course no one has bothered to read. I hate thinking someone would feel as though we're pushing them out, especially if they're doing a good job, but we really want to make sure people can feel comfortable about offering to chair something--that the current chair doesn't "own" the position. Ultimately the final decision rests with the officers who chairs. We're praying a couple of notorious, well meaning but completely inept people don't offer to chair. Having to turn them down is going to really suck!

After the most recent conversation I had with this PIA and receiving information about what was said in her meeting with the chair of the fundraiser in question and the other member, it became very clear that: she's saying things she KNOWS I'll never agree to just to egg me into a fight so I'll be the control freak, and that she's just out to get stick it to me. Unfortunately her sticking it to me in this case could be detrimental to the project. If this were just a fundraiser of the normal kind I would let it go, but this one is a biggie, and we need the funds to be able to accept our matching grant, and more importantly it's our first fundraiser really involving the kids and including our entire community. I refuse to stand by silently while she could potentially orchestrte a distaster. I guess the "control freak" shoe fits, so I might as well put it on and boot her in the @ss with it!

Okay, I skimmed and I'm not certain if this has been addressed but in terms of a contract, as President, you are the one that would be held liable if a case arose, not the committee chair. It's technically your butt on the line and therefore, you have EVERY right to be involved in the contract process. You should be signing it, not the chair.

She's in the wrong. If I want to attend I do. So far, no one has had a problem with it in our PTO (at least that I am aware). She should be given enough freedom to research what is needed without you being involved in every detail, but if she can't do it then you need to step in.

We currently have a sub-committee working on fundraising for next year (3 people on the committee which I think helps too).

I try to make sure we always have a group (ususally of 3) doing stuff rather than a single person - it puts to much responsibility and control in them and if they drop the ball, no one knows until the last minute which ends up making not only the PTO but myself look bad. I don't like either of those.

A couple recommendations

- If the conflict is primarily with you, get the VP involved to accomplish what you would be there for. Sometimes personalities just done work well.

- Talk to her and ask her to make sure you are provided meeting notes/progress reports for meetings she does not invite you to. Remind her that fundraising is probably the largest function of the PTO and ultimately you are responsible so you would like to be kept up on progress and also be able to provide feedback to what occurred at those meetings.

- If she won't have you there, won't keep you updated, and is truely doing a poor jobs for the organization, vote her out. Check your by-laws.

I'm not sure how your committe chairs are decided, but with our PTO, the president is responsible to assigning the positions to people. If that is the case with your PTO, take next year as an opportunity to clean house.

The thing is with our group is that we're new--naturally I and the VP want to be involved and up to speed on everything, even if just for future reference or for the experience down the road. The other chairs are fine--they do their thing, they check in, we're set. With this fundraising chair I'm beyond annoyed--I can't tell you how many times we've told her we (or at least one of us) want to be in on meetings, and yet she sets them up and doesn't ask either one of us to be there--she justifies it by saying we're TOO invovlved and that it's not appropriate for us to be there. :confused: Excuse me? I'm the president and I want to be there for whatever reason and that's inappropriate? Especially when you've been dropping the ball and making potentially disasterous mistakes?!

I just found out she called another meeting with the next event's chair and another member to discuss the event. Personally I think she's trying to push it to the point where we have to call a meeting with the board and then officially tell her she has to step down. This way she can play the martyr and run around the school and town telling anyone who will listen how unprofessional we are and how we all ganged up on her.