The State Election Enforcement Commission can decide on the BoE robocalls..

The State Election Enforcement Commission can decide on the BoE robocalls. Attached is the filing sent to the State Election Enforcement Commission (SEEC) on the multiple robocalls and outreach or GOTV attempts prior to the last referendum by Windsor Public School Administrators. I said I would file documents with the appropriate authorities in due time and I have done so.      
  
Since the original article I have received calls from other communities where they have similar complaints so this is not an isolated issue. 

  
The Public Act cited in the complaint indicates certain powers vested in Municipalities, and Regional School Districts. In Municipalities it further discusses certain powers vested in Municipal Government officials (Governing body, Clerk, Attorney). The Act does not address one town Boards of Education like Windsor and thus arguably, they are excluded. Also a BoE does not have a "Municipal Clerk" or a "Municipal Attorney" as the act states. The SEEC has allowed students to be used as couriers and that is not the issue. The issue is the overt campaigning to "get out the vote (GOTV)" to a select subset of voters (parents or guardians with children in the public schools) and this means all the other voters did not receive such notification. Is that fair to all citizens? 

  
I requested in the filing that a series of questions that I will repeat here be answered so all municipalities, Board of Education, communities, voters, and citizens can have clear parameters to work within. 
  
They are: 
Question #1: 
Does the Superintendent of Schools have the authority to act on his own and without the approval of a “Municipal Governing Body” or the Single Municipality Board of Education to notify the public of an upcoming election using public resources? Is this action even legal without authorization? 

  
Question #2:
In Public Act. Sec. 9-369b, there is a clearly prescribed method of producing materials and information, and it omits any reference to a Single Municipality Board of Education. Under what authority may a Single Municipality Board of Education campaign for a referendum when the act clearly indicates that power resides within the municipalities’ Governing Body, Municipal Attorney, and Municipal Clerk and does not specify in any way a Single Municipality Board of Education. 
  
Question #3: 
Does the notification to a particular small subset of voters (public schools parents and/or guardians) repeatedly over 5 days represent campaigning? At what point do repetitive phone calls and e-mails sent to a specific subset of voters in the days before an election or referendum, where such communications are specifically designed to "get out the vote" as stated by The Superintendent of Schools and increase turnout among this subset of voters become an improper use of town resources designed to influence the outcome of a vote? 
  
Question #4: 
Does a Board of Education within a Municipality have the right to use its resources without the clear approval of the Municipal Governing Body (Windsor Town Council) to make these sorts of calls to a specific subset of voters. 
  
Question #5: 
When does a notification by a Board of Education to a subset of voters become campaigning?  1, 2, 3 or more contacts within 5 days? Please provide clear instructions. 
  
Question #6: 
Fairness requires a municipality to reasonably attempt to contact all voters to inform them of election related information. Does a campaign by a Board of Education to get the vote out targeting parents or guardians of public school age children that are presumed more favorably inclined to Board of Education spending and that specifically does not notify the majority of voters in a municipality become an issue of fairness.