We think this is the state statute that might have been violated at last nights BOE Meeting Reply

pchamstand2…key words are influence, briber, and willfully…

Sec. 9-364a. (Formerly Sec. 9-344). Acts prohibited in elections, primaries, referenda, caucuses and conventions. Penalties.

Any person who influences or attempts to influence by force or threat the vote, or by force, threat, bribery or corrupt means, the speech, of any person in a primary, caucus, referendum convention or election; or wilfully and fraudulently suppresses or destroys any vote or ballot properly given or cast or, in counting such votes or ballots, wilfully miscounts or misrepresents the number thereof; and any presiding or other officer of a primary, caucus or convention who wilfully announces the result of a ballot or vote of such primary, caucus or convention, untruly and wrongfully, shall be guilty of a class C felony.

About the Superintendents offer last night..is it illegal under state statutes? Did she violate the law? 3

In previous budget discussions with the Board Of Education, it has been clearly stated that ANY information that is put before the public can ask for a Yes or No vote….look back at previous Board meetings on the CATV 6 Youtube Page, peruse old board meetings, and you will find this discussion many times.


I am not sure  if this is the exact statute, but this following line was mentioned at several of the board meetings….”no employee, of any school district in the State of Connecticut, can publicly promote or coerce a  “yes” or “no” vote on any municipal  referendum.   Pamphlets can be printed urging the public to “get out and vote”, but the law clearly states that written materials or public statements cannot urge, or promote either a “yes” or “no” vote on a budget referendum.

Does the board need to look up state statutes to investigate this? I think so. Should individuals in the Region One district  know if what was proposed last night was within the state statutes, we think so.

Any question on this “offer” to pass the referendum  should be cleared up immediately, as to not interferelaw with the next vote by raising questions of possible violations of state statutes that would invalidate the referendum, or has, with this offer, the current referendum already been invalidate, questions that need to be answered by town lawyers, and the State of Connecticut Board Of Education.

From The Republican-American Reply

Full Story at this link


Region 1 won’t buy iPads


FALLS VILLAGE — In a fifth attempt to get a budget passed, Region 1 Board of Education members voted Thursday to remove a $94,000 appropriation that was to go toward purchasing iPad Minis for all students at Housatonic Valley Regional High School.During a meeting that again filled the high school library, Chairman Jonathan Moore of Kent recommended the cut, saying with school close to opening, it would be too late to implement the program. Technology and the three-year contracts that provide 2 percent annual raises for the superintendent and assistant superintendent have been the lightning rods during this contentious budget season.

Superintendent Patricia Chamberlain said Thursday that if the budget passes on the fifth try, she would give up the last year of her three-year contract and donate her 2 percent raise to the school’s endowment fund for the children.

Moore said that although Assistant Superintendent Diane Goncalves’ contract has also been an issue, attorneys have said it cannot be discussed because of a pending lawsuit. Goncalves is suing Falls Village board member Gale C. Toensing, claiming she has caused her emotional distress. Goncalves was not at the meeting.

Chamberlain is also being sued by her executive secretary, Lucille Paige, who is charging, among other things, that she was denied her right to free speech for taking part in an independent investigation of the region. Paige is currently on paid administrative leave.

During the comment period, William Arlofski of Reverse Polarity in Canaan, which services some the region’s elementary schools, said many inaccuracies relating to technology costs have been made at board meetings. He said the position of network technician should be reconsidered because the region is setting itself up for failure.

Michael Ellington of Canaan noted the school has no technology plan. “You’re throwing extra money at this. The curriculum should drive your technology. Where’s the plan?” he asked.

Contact Ruth Epstein at kcsruthe@aol.com.


2012-13 approved: $14,689,095

2013-14 proposed: $14,446,284

Decrease: $246,811 or 1.65 percent

Next: Referendum Aug. 20, noon to 8 p.m. at region’s town halls.