I don't like the dues thing, but I get voted down everytime I mention it. I agree that volunteering and/or dues should have equal weight and get a vote. Our bylaws state member in good standing (dues paid and attend two meetings or volunteer) gets to vote.

would you turn down a cash donation , or time donation (ie at a fundraising event) from a parent who cant, or doesnt want to , come to the meetings?

then why demand attendance minimums, in order to vote?

Our $5 membership dues came into effect years ago when there was a problem at an election. Two women were running against each other for the presidency. The one woman lined the room with anyone and everyone she knew. They were people who never volunteered or attended anything that voted this woman into the presidency. Of course these people were never heard from or seen again in any capacity after she won. After that they changed their policy to joining the PTO for $5 membership dues. So at the very least the people voting were at least members. Nothing is a perfect policy and loopholes can always be found if someone looks hard enough.

While I do agree that attending meetings helps a person understand the process. There are plenty of people who trust the people in charge, can't make it to meetings, or simply don't want to get involved in the politics. Especially if your group is running smoothly it makes the masses less interested in what is going on at your meetings. When you start putting criteria on who can vote and who can't vote it only makes the group exclusive rather than inclusive. I think it also makes a group look like they want to conrtol everything including the elections.

Lastly just because people don't attend meetings don't assume that some of them do not know what went on at them. I have any number of people who do not make it to meetings that will ask me personally what went on or email me and ask me. That being said I assume that all of our board members or regular members in attendance get asked by people they know what went on at the meeting.

mommaluch;131818 wrote: We too have in our bylaws that you must be at at least 3 mtgs. per year to qualify to vote. I agree that there should be less enphasis on mtg attendance than on coming out to volunteer, but the best way to actually know how the board works and thinks is to be at mtgs. You don't get to know the board at events. We really believe that this needs to be an educated decision and not a popularity contest. If you are not part of the decision making process (which is done at mtgs.) how can you step up to be nominated or know who would be the best rep for your school!

Fortunately I have the time and want to attend mtgs- but if a PTA/PTO gets bylaws out to parents, minutes, budget, and pertanent (sp?) info out to memebrs, one who doesnt have the time to attend can be just as well informed as those that attend mtgs. I attend mtgs because I can, not to see how the board works, thinks (I can get that by talking to them and not sitting in a boring mtg). I want to be involved in shaping the org, jsut because on cant doesnt mean they cant be informed or educated about policies, procedures, etc.

I'm not a memebr of the CA Assembly or US Congress - I know how it works, thinks, and can make educated decisions on whom to vote for each election.

Parental involvement, voting, etc- should not have any attendance req

I realize some do have policies like it but like dues I disagree (but pay 'cuz its the only gig in town)

We recently had this problem with our PTO. The bylaws stated that a member had to attend 3 meetings to be eligible to vote on anything that goes on at meetings or elections. This seemed high to me and allowed the board to run rampant for most of the school year until parents had enough attendance in to have a say. To me, if you are interested enough in the school to come out to one meeting you should have a voice at the meeting. When I became President the first thing I did was to rewrite the bylaws to make the group more inclusive. The last thing I want is for our group to feel clique-y and excluding a group based on attendance seems to do that. I have had tons of positive feed back on the new bylaws which state that a member has to attend at least one meeting to gain voting rights. If our increase in attendance says anything it says that parents want to have a voice in exchange for their time!

i think its a turn off to require attendance in order to vote.

some of our biggest contributors (of time and or money) never attend meetings for logistical or other , reasons.

if you dont ASK people in advance if the day/times if yur mtgs fit their persoal schedule, you cant hold them to coming to meetings with the stick of 'your vote counts only if yuo attend'.

pto invovlement/commitment is not correlated wth attendance. i would say let every dues paying member have a vote (or non dues paying member, if you dont have dues). that is democratic.