Virginia Beach school board amends phone regulation; vote later reopened for reconsideration

The Virginia Beach City Public Schools (VBCPS) School Board voted on June 24 to adopt an amendment to regulation 5-52.1 that removes language permitting high school students to use personal electronic devices during a designated lunch period, then later approved a motion to reopen that vote for reconsideration.

Why it matters: The decision comes as the state moves to codify “bell-to-bell” limits on student phone use and as local administrators, teachers and parents press for clarity about how the law should be applied. Board members and speakers focused on enforcement burdens, student safety and the lack of final guidance from the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE).

Chief Schools Officer Matthew Delaney presented division data showing a sharp rise in documented cell-phone discipline referrals after district enforcement increased this spring. "During the 2425 school year, there were 6,684 referrals where cell phone violations are the primary reason for the referral," Delaney said, and noted that high schools accounted for roughly three-quarters of those referrals.

Public commenters and school staff offered contrasting views. Heather Sipe, president of the Virginia Beach Education Association, urged flexibility: "If our legislators intended for us to completely prohibit, they would have used the word prohibit...They chose to use the word restrict." High school math teacher Dawn Newman described the workload of enforcing phone rules and the time required to process referrals, saying, "Every cell phone violation that is documented requires a written referral that takes at least 5 minutes to write."

Board debate turned on two issues: compliance with the new state law and how enforcement would affect teachers and administrators. Vice Chair Weems offered a substitute motion that removed an exception for high-school lunch use (and struck an elementary/middle-school phrase), which the board approved on a 9–2 recorded vote. Later in the meeting, board member Mister Cummings moved and the board approved a motion to reconsider that substitute vote by an 8–3 tally, reopening the question before adjournment.

The board and staff emphasized uncertainty from state regulators. Delaney told members the VDOE had not yet issued the implementation guidance they expected: "We have not received any information from the VDOE on recent legislation and implementation support." Several board members said they planned further review once that guidance arrives.

What comes next: Because the board approved a motion to reconsider the substitute motion, the regulation’s final status was unsettled at the end of the June 24 meeting. Board members said they will seek VDOE clarification and may revisit the regulation at a future meeting. The new state statute taking effect July 1 was repeatedly cited in discussion as the external constraint guiding the board’s options.

Speaker reactions: Advocates for a strict bell-to-bell approach cited research on screen time and classroom disruption; those asking for an exception for lunchtime raised concerns about student maturity, communication with families and the administrative burden of strict enforcement. Multiple board members said they intend to coordinate a clear, divisionwide communication plan for families and staff once the district and the VDOE provide definitive guidance.

The board’s debate illustrated the practical tension between following a newly codified state standard and the on-the-ground challenges principals and teachers said they would face enforcing a ban across 12 high schools and many thousands of students.