Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Student Technology And Phone Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
BRSSD holds parent forum on smartphone impacts and plans policy input ahead of state deadline
Summary
Belmont-Redwood Shores School District hosted a virtual parent session on smartphone use, mental health and practical family strategies; district staff said site-level phone restrictions already exist and that the district will solicit parent and student input before drafting a districtwide policy required under state law.
Get email alerts on the Student Technology And Phone Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Belmont-Redwood Shores School District (BRSSD) staff led a virtual parent session on smartphone use, youth mental health and family strategies, and said the district will collect parent and student input before drafting a districtwide phone-use policy to satisfy a new state requirement.
K. Savia, a BRSSD staff member who led the session, told attendees that "by January 2026, every school district needs to have a policy in place limiting the use of, phones on campuses," and that the district will hold an input session in March and collect additional comments before a policy is drafted. She said site-level phone restrictions already exist at the district's elementary and middle schools and that the forthcoming district policy will likely be similar to those site policies.
The session covered research linking social-media adoption beginning around 2010–2015 to rising rates of adolescent anxiety and depression, a summary of developmentally appropriate "play-based" childhood experiences, and practical steps parents can take when deciding if and when children should receive phones or social accounts. Savia cited The Anxious Generation and showed district-appropriate resources, and recommended Common Sense Media as a practical guidance source for families.
Savia described a range of family strategies discussed during the session: start small (for example, a house phone or smartwatch before a smartphone), set shared family agreements (phones out of bedrooms at night, common charging locations), front-load children about expected screen time during visits with relatives, maintain open lines of communication and validation when setting boundaries, and avoid overreliance on parental-control software because children can often work around those controls. "Do not rely on parental controls because the kids learn how to work around them very quickly," Savia said.
Parents at the session raised practical concerns and trade-offs: how to enforce household rules when visiting relatives who use screens freely; how to persuade teenagers who say apps are essential for their social lives (parents noted that peers often use Snapchat or similar apps for group communication); and how to find resources teenagers will read and take seriously. One parent said their 5-year-old became highly distressed when screen access was removed after multi-day exposure, and Savia recommended front-loading children and curating no-screen activities during family gatherings.
On district policy, Savia said BRSSD currently has similar site-level rules across its seven schools that generally require phones to be put away during the school day, with exceptions for documented medical reasons. She added that Superintendent Deguara is organizing multiple opportunities for public input and that staff will solicit student perspectives before finalizing a districtwide policy. (In the session Savia referenced two different timelines for the state requirement—"by January 2026" in one comment and "it has to be done by July 2026" in another; she did not resolve that difference during the meeting.)
The district presenter said she will share session materials and a recording through ParentSquare and provided an email for follow-up: ksavia@brssd.org. Savia also announced a planned March input session to gather parent feedback and said she would forward parents' comments to Superintendent Deguara.
The session mixed research summary and practical parenting guidance rather than formal board action; no motions or votes were recorded. Attendees were invited to participate in the district's upcoming public input process on phone-use policy.

