To add to the PTA/PTO discussion.
Jan Mussler (mussler@SPOT.COLORADO.EDU)
Mon, 20 Apr 1998 11:47:05 -0600
I have some recent experience to add to the discussion. We recently had
a member of our PTO bring to the table that the PTO should not sponsor our
pack because we did not accept atheist member. He brought the PTO to a
vote regarding our sponsorship. After receiving counsel from the District
Office, the CC and CM wrote a positive upbeat letter stating that we hoped
the PTO would consider the Pack an addition to their program of
activities. While we did not meet the needs of all families in the
School, we represented the families of one third of eligible boys. We did
not attend "en masse" on instruction from the Council executive. We would
have liked to, on some level, but the counsel felt we'd feed the agenda of
the individuals bringing the complaint. The PTO member was 'representing
the opinion or agenda" of one individual (who, BTW, has no sons). She was
deeply offended by our displays in the trophy case (Pinewood derby cars)
and the wearing of uniforms. The PTO voted to continue our sponsorship for
the next year. The complaintants changed tactics and asked for a vote
that the PTO not sponsor any "religious" organizations. They haven't
voted yet on this, but the School District lawyers have sent a letter of
recommendation to the PTO to drop our sponsorship. We understand that the
letter will go to all the schools in the district as well, though I
haven't heard this officially yet.
We are dismayed, but confident we can (and have had one offer) find a new
sponsor, and still rent the school space as we have been (the PTO
basically made us a "grant" of $200 which we used to pay the school rent
for activities). Life gave us lemons, but we may make lemonade as this
opens us up to some other opportunities.
Food for thought, anyway.
Jan Mussler, Webelos Den Leader, Pack 170
Nederland, CO - Long's Peak Council
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City