FCPS staff tighten weapon rules, propose bell-to-bell cellphone restriction; board signals lunchtime exception for high schools

FCPS staff presented final revisions to the Students Rights and Responsibilities regulation (Regulation 26.01) on April 8, 2025, recommending a uniform, non-discretionary approach to weapon-related suspensions and proposing changes to the division's cellphone policy to conform with new state law. Board members asked detailed questions about legal language, implementation, equity and enforcement; by informal show of hands the board signaled a preference to allow high school students limited cellphone use during lunch and passing periods rather than a strict bell-to-bell ban.

The most immediate, substantive change staff proposed for Regulation 26.01 would remove administrative discretion for many weapon offenses. Tianna Shin, senior manager for equity and student conduct, told the board that the final proposal “mandates that for any violations involving possession or use of statutory weapons … the following 2 actions shall be required without exception. A suspension for up to 10 days and a referral to the school based risk prevention team.” The referral would trigger further risk assessment under Regulation 21.11 and allow additional interventions.

Why it matters: staff said the change is intended to ensure uniform outcomes across schools and to reduce discretionary variation that, board members argued, can worsen disproportionality for Black students, Hispanic students, students with disabilities and multilingual learners. Kathleen Waltz, executive director of equity and student relations, described the revision as an attempt to “balance student and school safety with a structured intervention framework.” Staff also proposed simplifying monitoring language so the chief equity office and chief of schools will conduct semester reviews of cases involving weapons, assault and assault and battery to confirm required interventions are used.

Cellphone policy and state law: staff reviewed data from a storage-unit pilot and said the passage of Senate Bill 738 (SB 7 38) and related state guidance shaped the recommended cellphone policy. Staff recommended amending the SR&R to “ban student possession and use of cell phones, personal tablets, cell phone accessories, and smart devices on school property bell to bell” effective July 1, 2025, with accommodations for students with IEPs or 504 plans and direction that students may not be suspended or expelled solely for a cell-phone violation. The staff memo stated enforcement should “minimize to the extent possible any conflict with the instructional responsibilities of teachers.”

Staff presented pilot data showing fewer recorded cellphone violations at schools that used storage units: between Aug. 19 and Sept. 30, 2024, pilot middle schools reported 64 cellphone violations versus 428 at comparison middle schools; in the same period pilot high schools reported 1,170 violations versus 1,587 at comparison high schools. For Oct. 1, 2024–Jan. 31, 2025, pilot middle schools reported 433 violations versus 809 at comparison middle schools; pilot high schools reported 1,936 violations versus 2,107 at comparison high schools. Staff emphasized the pilot ran under the district’s previous cellphone rules and that the new law changes the starting point for any divisionwide policy.

Implementation, enforcement and funding: staff recommended that principals decide whether to require on‑site storage (pouches, lockers, tote units) at the school level. The division will not purchase storage pouches for every school; principals may use school funds to buy them. Staff recommended that students “personally store their cell phones … keeping them off and away from the arrival bell to the dismissal bell each day,” and that administrators—not classroom teachers—be primarily responsible for handling cellphone discipline. The proposed cellphone discipline matrix would require interventions for every violation level, allow administrators to select one intervention option rather than all listed options, and restore a 20‑day loss‑of‑privilege period for a fourth violation (staff said this was changed after pilot feedback).

Board discussion and equity concerns: board members repeatedly pressed staff on the statutory language. School Board Member Rachna Sizemore Heizer said, “a restriction and a ban are not the same thing,” noting the law uses the term “restrict” and refers to developmentally appropriate limitations. Board members emphasized the risk that strict bell-to-bell enforcement could “out” students with accommodations; Vice Chair Anderson and others asked what protections the division would put in place for students with IEPs or 504 plans and how the division would avoid stigmatizing those students. Dr. King (Superintendent) and staff said accommodations would be provided and committed to convening additional staff work to develop protection strategies and guidance for principals and teachers.

Board direction and next steps: staff said the redline of Regulation 26.01 (showing the proposed changes) will be posted as new business for the April 2025 regular school board meeting. After a lengthy public table discussion, the board took an informal, nonbinding show‑of‑hands that—by the tally recorded in the meeting—favored allowing high school students cellphone access during lunch and passing periods rather than adopting the staff’s conservative bell‑to‑bell interpretation. Staff said they will return on May 8 and that the regulation can be revised again when the Virginia Department of Education issues model policies required by state law (SB 980) concerning cyberbullying and related protections.

What’s unresolved: staff interpreted recent state bills (SB 738 and related code language) conservatively when drafting the bell‑to‑bell recommendation; several board members disagreed with that interpretation and asked staff to refine the language to allow “developmentally appropriate” windows such as lunch for some high school students. Board members also pressed for clearer, divisionwide communications to families and for specific safeguards to prevent bullying or outing of students who receive accommodations. Staff committed to follow‑up work, additional data (including a longer pilot data set on cellphone violations) and clearer guidance for administrators.

Speakers

- Tianna Shin, Senior Manager for Equity and Student Conduct (government, FCPS staff) - Kathleen Waltz, Executive Director, Equity and Student Relations (government, FCPS staff) - Lisa Forrest, Administrative Hearings Officer (government, FCPS staff) - Dr. Michelle King, Superintendent (government, FCPS staff) - Dr. Reed (meeting manager; role referenced in transcript as meeting manager) (government) - Rachna Sizemore Heizer, School Board Member (government) - Vice Chair Anderson, School Board Member (transcript: Miss Anderson) (government) - Mr. Frisch, School Board Member (Chair) (government) - Ms. Marin, School Board Member (government) - Ms. Dixit, School Board Member (government) - Mr. Moon, School Board Member (government) - Mr. Foster, FCPS staff (attended during the discussion) (government)

Authorities

- {"type":"statute","name":"Code of Virginia §2.2-3712(D)","referenced_by":["closed meeting certification"]} - {"type":"statute","name":"Senate Bill 980 (2025) — cyberbullying model policies (VDOE)","referenced_by":["SR&R cyberbullying update"]} - {"type":"statute","name":"Senate Bill 738 (SB 7 38) — student device possession/use restrictions (2025)","referenced_by":["cellphone policy recommendation"]} - {"type":"statute","name":"House Bill 1961 (2025) — local school district cellphone policy requirement (referenced)","referenced_by":["cellphone policy questions/discussion"]}

Actions

- {"kind":"other","motion":"Certification of compliance with Code of Virginia §2.2-3712(D) for the closed meeting held 04/08/2025","mover":"motion recorded in transcript","second":"not specified","vote_record":[{"member":"Miss Sizemore Heizer","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Miss Anderson","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Miss Saint John Cunning","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Mister McDaniel","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Mister Moon","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Miss Dixit","vote":"yes"},{"member":"and myself","vote":"yes"}],"tally":{"yes":7,"no":0,"abstain":0},"legal_threshold":{"met":true,"notes":"Unanimous of members present; recorded as certification"},"outcome":"approved","notes":"Board certified closed meeting compliance pursuant to Code of Virginia §2.2-3712(D)."}

- {"kind":"other","motion":"Informal board consensus on cellphone policy implementation approach","mover":"board consensus recorded by Chair","second":"n/a","vote_record":[{"member":"Ms. Maron","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Ms. Dixit","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Mr. Moon","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Mr. Carl","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Ms. Sizemore Heizer","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Mr. McDaniel","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Ms. Anderson","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Chair (recorded as myself)","vote":"yes"}],"tally":{"yes":8,"no":0,"abstain":0},"legal_threshold":{"met":false,"notes":"Nonbinding informal show of hands; not a formal board vote"},"outcome":"consensus_note","notes":"Board signaled preference to allow high school students cellphone use during lunch and passing periods; staff to refine regulation language for formal vote."}

Discussion vs Decision

- Discussion: Policy language interpretation of state law (restrict vs ban); equity and stigmatization risks for students with IEP/504; enforcement burden on teachers; pilot data interpretation; storage costs and funding choices. - Direction/Assignment: Staff to post redline of Regulation 26.01 as new business for the April regular meeting; staff to refine cellphone policy language and return with additional guidance; staff to monitor VDOE model policies under SB 980 and update SR&R as needed. - Formal action: Closed-meeting certification (see actions).

Clarifying details

- {"category":"weapons_discipline","detail":"Mandatory referral + suspension for weapon-related violations","value":"suspension up to 10 days + referral to school-based risk prevention team","source_speaker":"Tianna Shin"} - {"category":"monitoring","detail":"Semester review of cases involving weapons, assault, assault and battery to determine use of required intervention","source_speaker":"staff"} - {"category":"cyberbullying","detail":"SB 980 requires local boards to align with VDOE model policies; policies must protect victims/witnesses and list support services","source_speaker":"staff"} - {"category":"cellphone_pilot_period_1","detail":"08/19/2024–09/30/2024 control vs storage counts","value":"middle: 428 vs 64; high: 1,587 vs 1,170","source_speaker":"Kathleen Waltz"} - {"category":"cellphone_pilot_period_2","detail":"10/01/2024–01/31/2025 control vs storage counts","value":"middle: 809 vs 433; high: 2,107 vs 1,936","source_speaker":"Kathleen Waltz"} - {"category":"cellphone_effective_date","detail":"Proposed policy changes to take effect","value":"2025-07-01","source_speaker":"staff"} - {"category":"storage_funding","detail":"No central division funds to purchase pouches; schools may use local school funds to purchase storage units","source_speaker":"staff"} - {"category":"discipline_matrix_change","detail":"Interventions required for every cell phone violation level; admin may select 1 intervention option; fourth violation loss of privilege restored to 20 days","source_speaker":"staff"}

Proper_names

- {"name":"FAIRFAX CO PBLC SCHS","type":"agency"} - {"name":"Regulation 26.01","type":"other"} - {"name":"Regulation 21.11","type":"other"} - {"name":"Virginia Department of Education","type":"agency"} - {"name":"Senate Bill 980","type":"statute"} - {"name":"Senate Bill 738","type":"statute"} - {"name":"House Bill 1961","type":"statute"} - {"name":"Chief Equity Office","type":"agency"}

Community_relevance

{"geographies":["Fairfax County, VA"],"funding_sources":["school-based funds (possible)","division general fund: not specified"],"impact_groups":["students with disabilities","multilingual learners","Black students","Hispanic students","economically disadvantaged students","high school working students"]}

Meeting_context

{"engagement_level":{"speakers_count":25,"duration_minutes":200,"items_count":2},"implementation_risk":"medium","history":[{"date":"2025-03-11","note":"First SR&R work session; staff incorporated feedback into this presentation"},{"date":"2025-04-08","note":"Second SR&R work session; board provided further direction and informal consensus"}],"notes":"State model policies under SB 980 pending from VDOE; cellphone law effective July 1, 2025."}

Searchable_tags

["student-discipline","cellphone-policy","SB738","SB980","IEP-504","school-safety","FCPS","Regulation-26.01"]

Provenance

{"transcript_segments":[{"block_id":"173.75","local_start":0,"local_end":182,"evidence_excerpt":"Good morning. Our desired outcomes today are to review the final proposed discipline recommendations and the final proposed cell phone policy and storage recommendations for the SR and R.","reason_code":"topicintro"},{"block_id":"4866.3003","local_start":0,"local_end":120,"evidence_excerpt":"Is, all those opposed? 0. 0. 0.","reason_code":"topicfinish"}]}