Revere Board holds first reading of tighter student cell‑phone policy after state law deadline

Revere Local Board of Education members heard a first reading March 18 of a revised student cell‑phone policy required under recently passed state law, with administrators urging limits on phone use during the school day while students and some parents urged more flexible options.

The proposed policy, presented by Superintendent Mr. White, responded to a state mandate that districts adopt a policy by July 1, 2025. White said the intent is to minimize in‑school phone use to reduce distractions, cyberbullying and social‑media drama and to increase engagement: "It is because of the state law that was passed that we have to have a policy in place by 07/01/2025," he told the board.

Board members were presented the policy rationale, details and implementation timeline; the board will take a second reading next month and, if approved, implement the policy for the 2025–26 school year. Students from Revere High School spoke during public comment, reporting widespread opposition and proposing alternatives such as classroom phone caddies.

Details of the proposal and administration guidance

White said the draft aims to limit phone use "as little as possible" during instructional time and clarified how the district plans to treat related devices. On smartwatches, he said enforcement will be situational: "If it's an issue, then we deal with it. If it's not and they're just using it like a watch, then leave it be." He added administrators do not plan searches or spot checks when a device is not causing a disruption.

The policy would allow students to access phones at their lockers for quick communications (for example, confirming after‑school pickup) and would permit phones on buses and during sanctioned extracurricular trips. White noted exceptions would be made for students with documented needs: "students on 504s, IEPs, for any kind of medical reason, we would create an exemption where they could have their cell phones with them," and argued administrators also may grant case‑by‑case exceptions (transcript: "Of course, we make an exception for that kind of thing").

The administration flagged several operational questions in the draft, and offered these practical approaches discussed at the meeting: - Smartwatches and similar wearables: staff will address only dispositive misuse during instruction rather than policing every device. - Bus use and extracurriculars: phones may remain with students; drivers may ask students to put devices away if they become a problem. - College Credit Plus (CCP) classes and multi‑factor authentication: White said teachers and Mr. Ferris will work on exemptions so CCP students can access required two‑factor authentication without leaving class. - Enforcement approach: teachers were encouraged to avoid disrupting instruction for immediate discipline; instead, staff should note incidents and report them to administration for follow‑up.

Student reaction and public comment

Two student speakers, Gabby Eiler and Erica Boggs, both juniors and members of the student group Revere Student Voices, told the board the revised policy is broadly opposed by the student body. Eiler said her survey of the high school returned 330 responses — about one‑third of the student population — and that "95% of them do not support the revised policy." She and other students urged the district to adopt a phone‑caddy system already used in some classrooms, which keeps devices accessible between classes while limiting in‑lesson use.

Boggs said caddies would also address safety and practical concerns. She recounted an evacuation triggered by an explosive substance in the science wing last year and said students needed to reach parents quickly; she argued that locking phones in lockers would hinder communication and could increase unauthorized leaving of class: "If phones are locked away, students will likely sneak around to check messages during bathroom breaks, undermining the very purpose of the policy."

Board and staff response

Board members thanked the students for their testimony and asked clarifying questions about differences between elementary/middle and high school rules. White said principals would retain discretion to adapt some elements at building level — for example, keeping the middle‑school practice of requiring phones be placed in lockers — and that the policy will be revisited annually.

Next steps

White described the timeline: the board treated the draft as a first reading on March 18, will hold a second reading the following month and aims to begin the policy with the 2025–26 school year in August if adopted. Administrators signaled readiness to draft narrow exemptions for medical needs and for CCP students.

Ending

The board did not vote on the policy at the March 18 meeting; it scheduled the second reading for next month and indicated the administration will refine language on exemptions, smartwatch handling and building‑level implementation before that session.