Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
North Bend SD 13 board moves to include passing periods in student cell‑phone ban; district to notify families before implementation
Summary
School leaders reviewed Policy JFCD on personal electronic devices and agreed to a first reading that explicitly includes passing periods; administrators said enforcement during passing periods will be limited by logistics and that the district will communicate the change in advance, with a target implementation timeline around Jan. 1.
The North Bend School Board reviewed proposed changes to Policy JFCD, the district’s student personal electronic device policy, and agreed to a first reading that explicitly extends the device restriction to passing periods.
District staff said the policy has been enforced during instructional time and that compliance has been strong so far this school year. "We've enforced the policy during class periods... 640 students on campus any given day, and we're averaging 1, some days, 2 cell phones a day that are being confiscated," a staff member identified in the meeting as Shane said when summarizing early results.
Staff noted that a governor's executive order specifically references passing periods; meeting presenters said the district intends to comply with that order. Shane said the district will communicate the change to families ahead of time and set a target effective date around Jan. 1 to give parents and students notice.
Administrators described practical limits on enforcement during passing periods. "I cannot have my teachers constantly in the hallways monitoring all our hallways and outside areas to see who's on their cell phone," Shane said, adding enforcement during passing periods will be "the best we can" given campus logistics. School staff described current classroom handling and office processing for confiscated devices: some teachers call the office and staff retrieve the phone; one teacher, Miss Geierman, said her department uses paper bags to secure turned‑in phones and a Google form to track retrieval so phones are kept in a secured office location.
Board discussion covered exceptions and accommodations. Staff said fewer than 10 students currently have documented exceptions to keep devices for medical or Individualized Education Program (IEP) needs; those exceptions are flagged in the student information system so classroom staff can verify them. The board and staff also discussed alternatives such as device lockers or Yondr pouches; staff said Yondr-style systems are costly and require district‑wide adoption for practical use and that the district would reserve such options as last‑resort measures because of cost, unlocking logistics and emergency access concerns.
Administrators raised safety concerns about approaches that would prevent immediate phone access during true emergencies: one staff member said that during a prior tsunami warning, cell phones allowed staff to communicate with parents and confirm student safety. Staff indicated they would prioritize safety and accessibility in any technology or locker scheme.
The board said it would consider a final adoption at a subsequent meeting after the required public notice period and staff outreach. The revision under consideration adds the phrase "including passing periods" to the policy's second line and clarifies language about rules and practices at different school levels; the board discussed implementing a "desk‑full" policy as a follow‑up practice after formal adoption.
