The elections ART treats the System Team as an order-taker that only receives tickets after feature teams decide. How should the Scrum Master / Team Coach coach the relationship?

On an elections ART, the System Team should be coached as a partner in planning enablers for environments and integration, not as an order-taker that only receives tickets after feature teams decide. Civic vote systems depend on shared test environments, integration paths, and operational readiness; those enablers need planned capacity with the System Team present, not work thrown over a wall. Continuing to throw tickets after feature decisions preserves local feature velocity while starving the environments that make an increment real. Staffing a help-desk SLA ranked by which Product Owner yells first turns scarce System Team capacity into a political queue rather than a planned collaboration. Asking the System Team to sit out PI Planning because infrastructure is "not a feature" excludes the very partners who make feature increments demonstrable and reliable for election operations. Exam caveat: SASM coaches System Team partnership and shared enabler planning at team/ART interfaces; it is not treating System Team as copy-shop ticket labor, and it is not RTE-only ownership of all infrastructure without team engagement. Operational check: include System Team capacity and enabler stories in the next elections PI Planning conversation, identify environment and integration needs for the highest-priority vote features, agree acceptance for those enablers with feature teams, and confirm during the PI that tickets are not the only discovery mechanism for System Team work. Revisit the partnership in Coach Sync if feature teams drift back to wall-throwing.