part 2 of difficult PTO transition..can we deny them?

[hkline]

Sorry ~ I am hitting a wall ~ and the lawyer can't see us for a week ~ but I don't want their email to sit there unresponded ...

I have another question ~ 2 prior board members want to be chairs on our legislation committee, I am fine with it however they were very clear that they wanted NOTHING to do with PTO, and they stepped down from their other chair seats. I responded with the following ~

XXXX,

I was on facebook today and noticed that you left a post on the PTO fan page. It was my understanding from your June 4th email that you and several of last year's PTO board members had decided to walk away from the PTO and all related committees.

XXXXX and XXXX have agreed to co-chair Legislation. Since we both were on the bylaw committee, we are very familiar with the bylaws. We decided to co-chair this a while ago and have already purchased our RROR books- pretty sure our info was on the chairperson list . Thanks!

We would be happy to have you on the legislation committee, but feel the position of chair should be filled by someone who has much experience in this area. We are seeking someone who has sat on legislative/bylaw committees for other organizations and/or has previous experience with Roberts Rules of Order, other than the few short months of last years bylaw committee. We will be more than happy to forward all your information to the committee chair when filled.

Sincerely,

Heather

(their email from June 4th ~ We did decide not to run for the board and to drop our committee chairs. Speaking for myself, I made that decision because I refuse to bust my butt and spend hundreds of hours of work, for a group that has treated me so poorly. And on a side note for that portion NO we have NOT treated her/them poorly, we've simply asked questions that we have gotten NO STRAIGHT forward answer, as it is we still are missing documents, have no idea if we're incorporated or if we've (PTO) filed taxes etc etc.

Personally due to their LACK of RROR I feel it IS our best interested as a PTO (not just board - but entire membership) to have a Chair that has more than a short term status on a bylaw committee, we do have a mother that is HIGHLY knowlegeable in RROR and we have extended an offer to her to be our legistation chair and we have yet to hear back from her. Are we (or I) stepping over them, or due to their email from June stating they wanted nothing to do with us or the PTO ok with saying we will forward their information along when we feel appropriate?

Thank you!

[STA]

If there is no specific guidance in your bylaws the individual or group with the authority to make appointments can use whatever criteria she/they feel is appropriate, and offer whatever explanation she/they decide is necessary.

[hkline]

If there is no specific guidance in your bylaws the individual or group with the authority to make appointments can use whatever criteria she/they feel is appropriate, and offer whatever explanation she/they decide is necessary.

The only section in our bylaws that mentions committee chairs is ~ "only members of the organization shall be eligible to serve in any elective or appointive position" ~ as I stated in my previous question/post was there is a lot of gray area/are for interpretation and that is a problem these bylaws/PTO has had for quite some time.

[STA]

Bylaws rarely cover every possible circumstance. Within the given parameters the members will expect the elected officers to do what is reasonable.

[Josh Martin]

The only section in our bylaws that mentions committee chairs is ~ "only members of the organization shall be eligible to serve in any elective or appointive position" ~ as I stated in my previous question/post was there is a lot of gray area/are for interpretation and that is a problem these bylaws/PTO has had for quite some time.

Okay. Then the appointing authority is free to pick whichever member of the organization would be best for the position.

[Trina]

The only section in our bylaws that mentions committee chairs is ~ "only members of the organization shall be eligible to serve in any elective or appointive position" ~ as I stated in my previous question/post was there is a lot of gray area/are for interpretation and that is a problem these bylaws/PTO has had for quite some time.

I've read through your original post more than once, and simply can't figure out for sure who is saying what there -- the presentation of facts is very confusing. However, I don't think there's much (if anything) there that matters from a parliamentary procedure p.o.v. It seems to boil down to a couple of people saying 'I would like to chair such-and-so committee' and you replying 'I'd rather see someone else as chair of such-and-so committee.' Neither their request, nor your response, has any official significance, as far as I can tell (unless the president of the organization has unilateral power of appointment). None of this is happening inside a meeting, so the issues, so far, seem to fall in the areas of politics and psychology (not the purview of this forum).

Do your bylaws say anything at all about the formation of committees? About how committees are created, and who appoints committee members? Does this legislation committee already exist?