Thanks for the replies.
I agree that there is probably something behind the grumbling. We know at least some of it. About 3 years ago, our playground equipment was inspected and determined to be below code, so we had to replace it. Our former president (for the last 2 years) was extremely focused on the playground. She cut alot of other things to raise the money for the playground, and so our PTO did not do as many things. The playground planning committee (which ended up being the president and vice-president at the time) developed a 3 year plan. We have completed 2 of the phases, but I think a number of our parents are a little tired of devoting everything to the playground for another year. As the new president, I am asking parents what they would like to do--finish the playground this year if possible (which would again devote every dime we fundraise to it) or put it on a 2 year plan, so we would have money to do other things around the building.
As for the other candidate, she had approached the former president a few times, but basically just to complain about what we were doing. When she was (supposedly) offered the opportunity to be involved in making decisions, or implementing the one plan I know she brought up (she did the 'I think "you" (the PTO) should be doing....' I was never told the suggestion,but it had something to do with how we run room parties, as that is a big peeve of hers), she acted a little put out, and never did anything to forward her suggestion. We think she got some of her friends together that were mad about the playground focus (even though it needed to be done), and that is why they ran in the election.
Anyway, I am hoping that, since her friend was elected vice-president, that we have some new blood in our board and that we can work with this group, instead of being the way things were this last spring.
Thanks again, Joan

Our bylaws also only state they must be a member in good standing (vague). My feeling is this. If the person running gets voted in, then maybe there is something to the claims this person was making and they are now stepping up to see the change take place. They have two choices: Step up or step out, and maybe they are stepping up. This person may not be addressing it in the best way, have they talked with the existing pres or is this out of the blue?

Sounds like there is something bigger going on here, especially since they had a group of supporters coming to vote.

Here is an excerpt from our bylaws. We had the same problem with people wanting to "stack the deck", to win an office, but had no PTO experience.

B. Voting Members; All regular members who have attended 50% or more meetings shall be designated as voting members. Voting Members shall have the right to vote on all issues before the organization, to elect officers, and to hold office.

The President shall be principal executive officer of the organization and, subject to the control of the Executive Committee and the direction of the membership, shall in general supervise and control all of the activities of the organization. The President shall be a member of the Executive Committee, and when present, shall preside at all meetings of the Executive Committee, and all meetings of the organization. The President shall vote only in the case of a tie in a vote of the Executive Committee or the organization. The President shall select and appoint the chairpersons of all-Standing and Special Committees, and shall be an ex-officio member of all committees of the organization. To be eligible to serve as President, a person must have been an active Participant, and a voting member of the organization for at least one year.

This has not affected our membership at all. Good Luck.

We just had a hostile situation at our elections. The other candidate for President, was very critical of everything our PTO did, and was not involved in anything (did not volunteer in classrooms, at room parties, or on any committees and did not attend any meetings, and really did not know what the PTO did, just that it was not doing what she thought it should be doing).
We are considering if we should clarify our bylaws, to have some minimum requirements for president. Currently, they state only that you must be a member in good standing, but we do not require dues, so all parents are automatic members, and we do not define what 'in good standing' is. I do not want it to seem that we are reacting to her in particular and want to keep her out of office--this whole process made us look at our bylaws, and how vague they were on actual elections (with more than one candidate)--our board had to come up with an election plan as there were no real guidelines in the bylaws (other than what to do when there was only one candidate per office as it usually happens). We realize we need to put in a basic guide (we had each candidate in all offices, not just the contested ones, fill out a brief questionaire asking their name, kids, PTO experience (of any kind), and goals for the office), but have been wondering if we should also put in minimum requirements for pres (like, minimum meeting attendance in the year prior to running, or must have held any other office or chaired a committee). We just think that someone who is not involved in any way should not be able to just step in and become president. However, we are also concerned that this may turn people away from the PTO, as it will look like we are doing this to 'spite' her and the other people who attended our May meeting specifically to vote (we had at least 10 people show up that have never done anything with the PTO in the past--they just came to vote for her).
Any suggestions or comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Joan