Committee endorses voluntary phone‑free incentive for schools; $10M appropriation proposed for lock‑pouches

Senate Bill 11, a phone‑free "anti‑distraction" policy, drew broad public testimony and committee discussion and was advanced with a recommendation to the Finance Committee for consideration of funding.

Bill concept and sponsor remarks: Senator Brantley introduced SB11 as an incentive (not a mandate) for school districts to adopt phone‑free policies and to provide financial support for lockable pouches or other secure storage during instructional time. "This is not a mandate. All this is is an incentive for PED to encourage our local school boards to do what is right by students," the sponsor said, describing the measure as voluntary and designed to allow local districts to adopt policies that fit their needs.

Support and opposition: Dozens of schools, teacher associations, charter representatives, superintendents and nonprofit groups testified in support. Supporters cited distractions, academic performance and student mental health concerns. "There is a lot of research out there that shows the negative impact social media is having on our children in regards to anxiety and depression, and I fully support this bill," said Serena Murillo, a teacher who testified about a donated locker that reduced classroom power struggles. The New Mexico School Boards Association and several districts said they support the bill because it is voluntary and funded. Some students and parents voiced concerns about access to phones at lunch and about learning to self‑manage phone use.

Policy mechanics and funding: The bill uses the term "encourage" to describe PED's role in outreach to local education agencies and proposes a below‑the‑line appropriation that districts could use to reimburse the cost of lock pouches or similar devices. The sponsor referenced a $10,000,000 appropriation figure in the draft fiscal materials as the basis for statewide reimbursement, explaining that figure was an illustrative estimate based on student counts and average pouch cost. Several senators asked whether PED would set reimbursement caps or submission procedures; PED staff said reimbursements would be implemented as guidance and that districts could be asked to submit proposals for reimbursement.

Committee concerns and resolution: Committee members raised concerns about (1) how PED would operationalize the instruction to "encourage" districts, (2) whether PED should set reimbursement limits to avoid outsize vendor purchases, and (3) exceptions such as students with individualized education plans (IEPs) who need phone access. PED said guidance to districts would likely take the form of policy memos and that reimbursement processes could be handled through proposals. Sponsor emphasized local control and the voluntary nature of the program.

Committee action: After a brief procedural no‑rec motion that failed, the committee voted to give SB11 a favorable "do pass" recommendation and sent it to the Senate Finance Committee for consideration of funding and implementation details.

Ending: Supporters said the bill would reduce classroom distractions and help teachers focus on instruction while preserving local discretion and room for IEP and emergency exceptions. Funding, reimbursement rules and precise PED guidance were left for Finance and later administrative rulemaking if the bill advances.