Committee hears testimony supporting statewide ban on student cell phone use during school day

House Labor and Commerce Committee members heard invited testimony Jan. 29 on House Bill 57, a bill that would direct the state to develop a model policy prohibiting use of non‑school issued wireless telecommunications devices in public schools during regular school hours.

Supporters — including a member of the Anchorage School Board, the state education commissioner, a national phone‑free schools organizer and a high school principal — told the committee that removing or restricting phone access during the school day improves attention, reduces disciplinary incidents and supports student mental health.

Kelly Lesson, a member of the Anchorage School Board, said she supports the bill’s intent but recommended a committee substitute to allow “a bit more nuance and discretion.” “I strongly believe that classroom time should be focused on learning,” Lesson said, and described ongoing work to update Anchorage School District board policy 5138 to restrict device access by age level. Lesson told the committee she planned to offer revisions at the district governance committee meeting the next day and that the board might vote on a policy in mid‑February.

Dina Bishop, commissioner of the Department of Education and Early Development, framed the proposal as a public‑health and learning issue. “The constant pull of technology isn’t just a challenge, it’s an epidemic that requires systemic solutions,” Bishop said, citing research on attention and youth mental health and the state board of education’s October 2024 resolution urging model policy development.

Kim Whitman, co‑founder of the Phone Free Schools Movement, urged a full bell‑to‑bell prohibition of phones and recommended removing the bill’s emergency‑use exception while retaining explicit exemptions for documented medical or IEP needs. “Phones can hinder crisis management, not help,” Whitman said, adding that administrators and first responders told advocates that student calls during an evacuation can complicate response.

Palmer High School Principal Dave Booth described three years of a schoolwide ban at his school: “At Palmer High School, we have banned cell phones, total cell phone use from 7 a.m. to 2:15,” Booth said, and reported declines in disciplinary incidents, vaping and failing grades after the ban.

Committee members focused on the tension between statewide standardization and local control; Representative Julie Burroughs (committee transcript: Representative Burke) and others asked how the bill would affect districts that rely on phones for occasional academic or distance‑learning needs. Lesson and Bishop both said local nuance and exemptions for instructional or medical needs should be considered; Lesson suggested a committee substitute to preserve local flexibility.

Representatives pressed witnesses about enforcement and the bill’s emergency‑use language. Principal Booth and others said consistent schoolwide expectations and staff support are critical to enforcement; Commissioner Bishop and Whitman urged districts and the Legislature to coordinate communications and implementation support so schools can provide alternatives when personal devices are restricted.

The hearing included offers to circulate written testimony and draft policy language to the committee. Committee leadership said it would gather the submitted materials and the several model policies referenced — the Anchorage proposed revision to board policy 5138, the State Board of Education’s October 2024 model outline, and the Association of Alaska School Boards’ template — for later review.

The committee did not vote on HB 57 at the Jan. 29 hearing. Members moved on to other agenda items; staff said the bill would be scheduled for further committee consideration once members had received the written materials and model policy language.

Why it matters: Supporters framed HB 57 as an attempt to protect classroom instruction time, reduce student exposure to harmful online content and support adolescent mental health, while critics on the committee urged preserving local control and ensuring districts have the resources to provide alternatives and to enforce any statewide rule.

What’s next: Witnesses agreed to provide written testimony and draft policies to the committee. Committee members indicated they would review model policy language and may propose a committee substitute that narrows or adjusts the bill’s required language before any committee vote.