Subcommittee drafts statewide requirement for school districts to restrict student cell-phone use, with narrow exceptions

A subcommittee of the Education Policy and Administration Committee voted Monday in a work session to recommend new language for two bills, HB131 and HB781, that would require school governing bodies to adopt policies restricting student cell‑phone use and other personal electronic communication devices in schools and to include narrow, approved exceptions.

The subcommittee — Chairman Terry, Representative Litchfield and Representative Hall — approved a remove‑and‑replace of the paragraph in both bills describing local policy duties, voted to set an effective date of Sept. 1, 2025, and agreed to send both bills to the full committee for further consideration. The committee did not resolve appropriations; HB781 as introduced contains a $250,000 appropriation while the governor’s proposed budget includes $1,000,000, a difference members said they would leave for the full committee to decide.

Why it matters: The language approved by the subcommittee would create a statewide floor for how schools handle personal devices. Supporters said the move aims to give local districts minimum guidance amid increasing concern from educators about classroom disruptions; opponents and some members cautioned against imposing a one‑size‑fits‑all implementation timetable and against rushing state funding decisions.

What the subcommittee approved - Required local action: The recommended paragraph directs school boards or the board of trustees of charter public schools to “develop and adopt a policy governing the use of student cell phones and other personal electronic communication devices in schools.” - Minimum standard: The policy “shall, at a minimum, restrict the use of student personal cell phones during class instruction,” with exceptions “determined by the superintendent or his or her designee with respect to student medical disability or language proficiency needs.” - Protected exceptions: The subcommittee added a clause that a school district policy “shall not prohibit students with medical needs (for example, insulin pumps and glucose sensing devices) or disabilities from using a device to support their learning as identified by an IEP or a plan developed under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, or when required to support emergent multilingual students with appropriate language access programs and services pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

Discussion highlights Representative Hall urged that the subcommittee consider funding so the directive does not become an unfunded mandate: “I would like to ask the committee to please consider having some type of funding available, so we don't put an unfunded mandate out there,” she said, noting both the governor’s $1,000,000 proposal and the bills’ $250,000 appropriation and warning that modest grants would not cover devices or pouches for every student.

Representative Paul pressed that the measure apply to public schools and asked whether charter schools should be included: “This applies to it's a school district, so it's only public schools. And wondering if we should be considering charter schools as well,” Paul said, and argued for leaving detailed choices about scheduling (for example, lunch or bell‑to‑bell) to local control.

Members debated specific wording: whether the state should require districts to “prohibit” device use schoolwide during the entire school day (the governor’s proposed language) or only require districts to “restrict” use at a minimum during classroom instruction. The panel voted to keep the minimum standard focused on class instruction but to allow districts discretion to adopt broader schoolwide rules.

The subcommittee also removed language that would have encouraged districts to permit student device use during instruction when an educator used devices as part of a lesson plan. Chairman Terry noted the panel struck that sentence from both bills and moved the recommendation forward.

Procedural outcomes and next steps - The subcommittee unanimously approved a motion to strike the sentence that had encouraged districts to consider exceptions for device use during instruction when educators used devices in lesson plans. - Members also approved language inserting an exceptions process: exceptions would be approved by the superintendent or the superintendent’s designee and would be limited to student medical disability and language‑proficiency needs. - The panel voted to remove and replace the relevant paragraph in both HB131 and HB781 and rescinded the earlier piecemeal votes so the recommendation to the full committee is a single, consolidated replacement paragraph. - The subcommittee set the bills’ effective date at Sept. 1, 2025, and recommended that HB781 (the “early” bill containing an appropriation section) be retained so the full committee can decide how to proceed on timing and funding.

The bills and remaining questions The subcommittee left the appropriation question to the full committee; members said they were not ready to adopt a funding position. They noted the difference between the bills as introduced (which reference a $250,000 appropriation) and the governor’s proposed fiscal‑year 2026 budget (which proposes $1,000,000). Members discussed practical costs (one witness referenced a widely used pouch system that costs about $30 per unit) and said they wanted school boards to have model policies available but cautioned that limited funds would not cover devices for every student.

The subcommittee’s changes and the consolidated replacement paragraph will be reported to the full committee. The full committee will consider whether to accept the recommended language, whether to add or remove an appropriation, and whether to set a different effective date or implementation timetable.

Quotes (selected) Representative Hall: “I would like to ask the committee to please consider having some type of funding available, so we don't put an unfunded mandate out there.”

Representative Paul: “This applies to it's a school district, so it's only public schools. And wondering if we should be considering charter schools as well.”

Chairman Terry (on the subcommittee action): “What we're talking about is with respect to both bills, we are eliminating the sentence ... that districts are encouraged to consider exceptions to student use during instruction when an educator is using devices as part of a lesson plan.”

Ending The subcommittee’s recommendation replaces the existing paragraph in both bills with a consolidated text requiring local governing bodies to develop and adopt policies limiting classroom cell‑phone use, preserving narrow exceptions, and sending the revised bills to the full committee. The full committee will decide next whether to adopt the subcommittee’s language, whether to act on the appropriation in HB781, and whether to change the proposed Sept. 1, 2025 effective date.