Dawn, it was a fair question and I'm very sorry if you feel bashed. I guess we all try to play detective a little bit. When I take a question at face value and try to answer it objectively, more often than not the original poster comes back with more info that completely changes the situation. I was really just hoping to have more info before answering.

Parent groups are forever battling the 'clique' perception so I also try to see if that's what is going on. Clearly you have valid concerns about this particular woman and the potentially negative impact she could have on the group.

Here's the thing. Your bylaws have to be followed. If she qualifies, she has to be allowed to run. Now, that said, she doesn't necessarily win just because she's unopposed. Depending on how your bylaws are worded, she can still be subject to a yes/no vote. She is presented to the voters and they can accept or reject her. If she gets the majority of members to vote yes, she wins. If not, she doesn't.

Can you tell us what your bylaws say about the election process?

I'm sorry you feel like you're being bashed, however I think it's safe to say that nobody intended for you to feel that way.

This parent is qualified according to your bylaws and has the right to run. Personal feelings are not enough to disqualify a person and your bylaws don't disqualify based on volunteer history, meeting attendance or parenting skills.

If the membership shares your feelings, someone else will have to step up and run against her.

This parent is not a volunteer at all. She has shown up for 2 PTO meeting for the year. She basically shows up for socilization before school with her child and lets her 2 year old run around the school while others are chasing him around. (he caught a microwave on fire in the building among other dangerous things) I don't think she would be responsible enough to be President or VP like she wants to be. (secretary maybe) I am not trying to find fault with her. She is not on a pmt schedule. she has only paid back $15 of a $350 debt owed since December 2006.
I feel like I am being bashed for a question that were trying to get fairly answered.

Ditto above....d

I agree with CrewChief and Serendipity for all the same reasons they mentioned- ESPECIALLY since she is on a payment plan.. in our school we NEVER see the money that the check bouncers make us lose.. they know we aren't going to send a collection agency after them, and we can't shut off their power...

However, what you are asking, I don't think you put in print. I think what you are trying to say is that you question this woman's ethics. IF she had to collect money for the fundraiser in advance, and was therefore paid by her customers, then why wasn't the money just submitted to the school?

Truth is.. it's more likely that maybe some people wrote checks to her, and she deposited them.. and MANY people just don't know how to keep a tight checkbook.. she could have paid bills, not realized or remembered there was X dollars in her acct for PTO, or perhaps the deposit timing was bad, and the check bounced.

Have you had other problems with her before? Is she a trusted volunteer? Is she liked and respected in the school community? Would she do a good job as President? I think THOSE are the questions you should be asking.

I have to agree 100% with Serendipity on this. I don't believe her debt to the PTO should be an issue. If she fulfills the bylaws requirement then I feel she should have the same right to run as any other parent.

Is there an underlying reason for not wanting this particular person to run for office? Or, like Serendipity mentions, is there just a preference to discourage all candidates to keep the existing officers?