S.B. 69 School Device Revisions: transcript

Yes, indeed. Great. And it worked out so perfect. 'cause, uh, my other meeting just ended and I just got to vote in judiciary, so I'm so happy to hear that worked out, Just like this was really just exactly how it should have been. So I thank you guys for having me. It's good to see you again. Um, I'm happy to be here about this bill. Uh, I think this is an important policy. So I wanna try to frame this policy for you this way. So there is a right state policy regarding, uh, electronic devices in schools. There's a right district policy, there's a right school policy, and there's a right family policy. Right? And when you come to districts and schools and families, the right thing might look different in different places. You know, families will set their rules about, um, about how their kids and, and their parents use cell phones, you know, where they need to be at night, or how much they can be during the day, how much time you can spend on 'em. Uh, you know, and, and those answers will vary. And there are real benefits to having e even young kids with a cell phone. You'll know where they are. You can reach them in case of an emergency. Um, uh, those are fantastic. And, and at a, at a school level, that will vary by schools from school to school. In fact, it might vary class to class. Uh, there, there might be, uh, very good reasons to, to have a device in an art class where you might be using a camera or you need to use the technology to do some things. And those things really should be left to schools. Um, and, uh, districts, uh, ought to be free to set their own policy or to outsource that to schools. Um, but the state policy, the state policy really should be zero. Um, the, these devices are, they're not cell phones, right? There are so many other things, including casinos and televisions and, um, I could call 'em an MP three player. But, you know, I look around on the committee and you guys don't know what I mean, if I say a Walkman, right? Um, uh, you know, it's those things. But in addition to being, uh, uh, a movie screen, it's also an adult movie screen. Uh, and in, in addition to being a chat device that replaces notes that you might've used to pass back and forth in school, it's also a casino. Uh, you know, underage gambling takes place in our country almost exclusively on these devices that we call cell phones. Um, uh, children viewing pornography happens almost exclusively on these devices that we call cell phones. So therefore, the state policy regarding these devices in schools ought to be at zero. That's the starting point. Um, they, they are addictive. Uh, they, uh, they harm kids mental development, I should say. They have potential gr uh, potentially great harm to children's mental and social development. Um, and then once you start at zero, then the decision becomes what can we add back? That's the decision that ought to be left to schools and districts. And so, Senate Bill 69, uh, takes that approach. We set the baseline for cell phones in schools at zero, and then fully empower school districts to add back so that they can take advantage of the potential that these devices have to improve education, uh, to improve student safety. So I'll just, in directing you to the bill, we set the baseline line 67 at zero, right? A student may not use a cell phone smartwatch or emerging technology during school hours. And then starting on lines, uh, 70, we add back and there, so there are five add backs that are at the state policy level. Uh, and I'll just read those to you. Those add backs are to respond to, uh, the immediate imminent threat to health or safety to respond to a school right emergency, to use the safe ut crisis line for, uh, to accommodate a student's IIEP or 5 0 4 accommodation plan, or to address a medical necessity. Those are the state level add-backs. And then if you look at line 77 through 79, those are the district and school add-backs, which is unlimited, as you'll see, in addition to those exceptions described up above, a school district may establish a policy that provides for any other circumstance in which the, the school district exercising its judgment thinks is appropriate, because it will help to enhance the educational experience. And there are ways that these devices can enhance the educational experience, can enhance family communication and support, and can enhance student safety. Uh, and we should leave districts free to adopt those policies at the local level, but they should be add backs to the baseline. So that's what senate Bill 69 does establish the appropriate baseline that then schools can add back to in whatever way they determine is appropriate. And that concludes my presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I appreciate the good sponsor for, um, his work with me on this bill over the years. Now that this has been in process, um, I do still have a number of questions. Um, and so I will try to go through them quickly. Um, so you'd made, um, earlier some comments about how cell phones have all these, um, potential, uh, risks and, and obviously uses that aren't, um, intended to be used in schools. Um, would you agree that that doesn't necessarily only just apply to children, that adults and all of us really have those same possibilities when it comes to access to these cell phones and technologies and whether the workplace or a home or at school?

Uh, so, uh, Mr. Chair of, of course, the answer to that is yes. I think the role of the state is different when we're talking about protecting children versus, uh, adults.

I appreciate that. And I guess my, my first question then is, is why does this not apply then universally in the schools? Why, why, for example, aren't staff administrators, um, educators, other individuals similarly held to the same policy requirements?

Mr. Chair, I think I answered that question when I answered the first question, which is, the state has a very different role in protecting children versus protecting adults. You know, we have an age of majority. I, i i, it, it really would be the same question that we might ask about, uh, transgender issues, you know, that we felt with here, you know, we are focused on protecting children, but we allow adults great freedom.

I appreciate that clarity. So why then, um, are we not excluding adults that are children in schools are essentially, we have 18 year olds that are voters. They have jobs, they, uh, may purchase this own equipment on their own, yet they, those adults are not held to the same standard as the other adults in the same building. I'm curious if you can help explain that.

Sure, Mr. Chair, in fact, those adults are not even required to be in public schools to the degree that younger children are. If they choose to attend public schools, uh, especially particularly with other children who will almost always be younger than them, then, uh, we just hold them to that same standard because we have a universal standard in public schools where, you know, 95 to 98% of the students are gonna be, uh, under the age of majority.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And, and I guess one last, um, kind of clarification here. Um, I know there's some carve outs for LEAs, um, to make their own specific policies, um, when it comes to these issues. And you'd indicated that that's intentional so that they can craft the right policy for the districts that make sense for them. I guess my question is, is where the parents come in into this process. So if they have unique situations where their options might be limited, where they don't want to, for example, put their student on an IEP or a 5 0 4 plan, because that wouldn't be appropriate, um, for them to enroll them in some sort of special education, but their family needs may require, um, some sort of, uh, access, perhaps, uh, an older student is picking up a younger, uh, sibling from another school, there's some basic communication coordination that may be happening even throughout the school day. Would it not make sense for parents to also have a role in helping determine, uh, that policy even if an LEA is opposed to that?

Mr. Chair? I think that does make sense. Uh, what we're dealing with here is that by, uh, by having school districts adopt this by policy, it will happen in a public meeting where any parent can go and, uh, and make a comment. Uh, they can call their school board members about what the policy ought to be. So I think the parents are involved in that setpoint because those school boards that make that policy are in fact directly accountable to the parents who attend their schools.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I would just say that, you know, by definition, these parents are going to be the minority and, and would be difficult for them to make those decisions, but I do appreciate that clarification.

Thank you. Um, I just, I have a, a few questions. I've, I've been wondering why we have this bill this year, because last year we heard a very similar bill and we were told that, you know, we just wanted every school to have a policy. And I remember two years ago, the governor came out and asked every school to get a cell phone policy. I was on a community council. We debated and debated and had robust conversation about what looked best for our school, what didn't. And as of last year in the law that we passed, every single school has already had that robust conversation and has come up with a policy that works for them. So now to come back and say, well, here's the baseline, but then you can still do whatever you want. It's like they've already figured out what works best for them. And so, um, I just have a hesitancy coming back and addressing this again when everyone has already, um, talked about that. I'd also say maybe on, uh, a, a question then on 72 and 73, when we're talking about the exceptions about, um, you know, being able to respond to an eminent threat or the health and safety of an individual in a schoolwide emergency, um, I think that would force a lot of, um, schools to change their policy. 'cause there's many right now who use those cell phone pouches. But then there's also some that use these carts where every kid puts in their cell phone at the beginning of the day, and if there was a school wide emergency or, um, imminent threat, those kids don't have access to it no matter what. And so now are we gonna make them go back and change all of this when they've spent thousands of dollars getting all of this equipment to hold, um, the kids' cell phones to their policy?

Mr. Chair, if that was a question, uh, I'd say the answer is that line 72 and 73 are current law. They're not changed in this bill. So, uh, the situation that Representative Voxer describes is in fact, current law. Uh, so I think there, there need to be no change there because we're not changing that portion of law. Those were in place in last year's bill, they're in place in this year's Bill. I'm not positive she phrased the, uh, her first point as a question or was just making a point, but I'll answer it anyway. And that is, I wish I had run this bill last year. I tried to run this bill last year, but the process of legislative negotiation landed on a different bill. But since that bill passed, dozens of other states have passed the bill that is more similar to what we're doing now. And the evidence from those schools are that they are working better than our current policy. And I think that that has been obvious to enough, uh, Senator Vickers and representatives that there's enough momentum to try to do it, uh, to try to pass this bill because it's been shown across the country to be the better policy.

I appreciate that. Thank you. I, I guess I would just lastly say that, um, parents are in charge of when they give their kids cell phones because they can decide what they need their kids to be able to have access to, um, if they're mature enough or not. I know as a parent, there's some that I've given to younger and some not, because I know, um, if, if they're mature enough to handle it. And so I don't love the idea of giving away that ability for the state to come in and override parents when parents are the primary decision makers in this, in this area.

And members of the committee. My Name name is Lindsay Butra and I serve as policy implementation manager for the policy project. Since the passage of SB 1 78 last year, we've worked with schools and districts navigating student device policies. And what we're seeing is clear schools are already moving toward more restrictive bell to bell approaches, not because of ideology, but because of day-to-day operational realities. Data collected by researchers at BYU show restrictive policies have more than tripled since 2018. While permissive policies have nearly disappeared, schools are making the shift because classroom only restrictions are difficult to enforce consistently and often create more conflict for teachers and students. Clear school-wide expectations work better in practice. While the research base is still emerging. The pattern is consistent. Meaningful improvements in student engagement, school climate and educator satisfaction occur when expectations are cleared and applied consistently throughout the day. In our work with schools and LEAs, we have not yet encountered a single school that has moved to limit device use and later chosen to reverse course. Schools are becoming more restrictive as they see positive impacts on learning and school culture. If I can, I'd like to close with the words of a Washington County educator whose school implemented be to be policy. Last year, they shared that the student resistance was far lower than expected. Parent concerns were minimal, and that creating a distraction-free learning environment felt like one of the thank thank you for your of the greatest gifts they could give their students. They added, we wish we had done it years earlier. Thank you for

Good afternoon. My name is Amy Winder Newton. I'm director of the Utah Office of Families. This is a great bill for families. This is good for our kids. Uh, we have taxpayers who are funding this education, and so to be able to have policies in place and for, for the state to set what the, the default policy should be is very appropriate. As we recognize that kids aren't at school to be texting or looking on social media or, um, playing on their phones, they're there to learn. Um, uh, we have heard multiple stories of schools who are so grateful that they, that they did this. Um, especially bell to bell where kids get a chance now to walk down the halls, look each other in the eye, um, have that social connection that they so badly need during lunches. Um, this is good for our state to stand up and say the right thing for kids is for phones to be put away during the day so that they can be, um, be educated and also have social connection. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Avery Gonzalez. This legislative, this legislation gives Utah the opportunity to make a brave choice. By voting yes, you protect something, students are quietly losing every day their attention, connection to one another, and their ability to truly be present. I want you to imagine this. You're reading an important report. You're focused, then your phone buzzes. Even if you don't pick it up, your mind shifts. Who was that? Is it important? What did I miss? Research shows it can take several, several minutes to fully regain deep focus after even a brief distraction. Now imagine that happening every passing period with only a classroom band. Students step into the hallway and immediately reconnect to text. Social media, group chats, videos, their brain switch this into social mode. Then the bell rings and they walk, they walk into the class, physically present, but mentally somewhere else. Teachers don't just lose seconds, they lose momentum. They, they lose the first several, several minutes trying to bring students back. As a student in the state of Utah, I urge you to vote yes to SB 69. Our students deserve learning environments that protect their future. Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm Kathleen Barlow. I'm a mom and an educator, uh, for 10 years. I'm also on the smartphone Free Childhood US Leadership team. And I'm also working with the Child First Policy Center. Uh, a Be to Bell ban will give students the chance to gain skills and confidence necessary to become independent adults. Before cell phones, childhood was traditionally a time for kids to venture out and do things on their own. Little by little, each child, each time a child leaves his comfort zone to try something scary and new, it will become a little less scary and new for both the child and the parent. School was once a place where these kinds of experiences happened on the regular before smartphones, beca began to keep us all unnaturally tethered to each other, 24 7. Um, and being constantly connected to our kids, we're depriving them of critical opportunities to learn and grow in a safe environment while still at home with family. And we're seeing that young adults are arriving at college in droves, quite unprepared for the daily struggles and opportunities that come with venturing out into the world. It's not just kids today that there are the anxious generation, it's parents and other caregivers as well. And we all need to practice helping our kids and ourselves become a little bit more uncomfortable with the discomfort to learning to let grow. As I've said before, the best way for us to teach our kids to live with smartphones in a healthy way is to give them lots of time and space to live away from them. Thank you.

Yes. Hello, chair and committee. I am Sarah Sanchez. I'm the founder of a business called Tam Your Tech. So I bet you can guess where I stand on this. I appreciate that parents can't easily opt their kids out of the phone ban because if every student could become the exception, it would negate the efficacy of the bill altogether. This bill is structured to protect kids by shifting the focus back to the original purpose for school to expand minds and ensure student success. I was in a high school classroom recently in which a student was asked to put his phone away. The student promptly asked if he could go to the bathroom. The teacher said yes, and the student took his phone with him for an extended bathroom break. This has to change. This ban extends to recess and lunchtime, and I support that a school should be allowed to have just as much jurisdiction over kids in the classroom as they have in the hallways or cafeteria. This bill takes protective measures to improve the social and academic environment such that everyone is better off than they were before. Please support SB 69. Thank you.

Hi. Thank you for the opportunity to share my experience as an educator. I am the instructional coach and a teacher at Crimson Cliffs High in Washington County. So shout out to Chairman Walter and representative. I listen. Thank you for all the work you do for Southern Utah. As an instructional coach, I'm in and out of classrooms frequently. The amount of engagement has skyrocketed with the current phone band, which I'm grateful for. And teachers are thrilled. The kids have been awesome too. Our district does still allow phones, um, during class breaks, lunch and during student free periods. At our high school, there is a stark contrast between the communication and presence in classrooms and outside of them. It has been sad to walk the halls during passing time and see students glued to their phones, disconnected from the world around them. Despite current policies, there are vast inconsistencies from school to school and classroom to classroom. We need a standard whereby we could do case by case adaptations and create a rich environment of human connection and learning. I urge the committee to support this bill and I thank you for your time.

Welcome, Michelle. Hello, My name is Michelle Linford. I, um, my flight got canceled yesterday, so I'm still hanging out with grandchildren. Um, so please pardon the background noise if there is any. Um, I am representing myself even though I am the digital wellness specialist for the policy project. Um, I wanted to come with that lens because initially when I heard that Senator Fillmore was going to move to a build to be bill, bill to bill approach, I was a little bit hesitant because we had done good work last year and I liked the flexibility. And then I, I also wanted to say I directed a nonprofit for 10 years in this space in digital wellness. So this is kind of my bread and butter. And, um, just a few weeks ago I attended a, a press conference right before this bill was announced. And, um, Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath shared his research. He is a cognitive neuroscientist and he talked about, and some of these things have been touched on before, but he talked about the cost of the distraction, um, to the brain and its capacity to learn. And even with the, the classroom, only if someone is shifting from a classroom where they don't have the phone, but they know their phone is even in their locker, that anticipatory, um, interest and distraction will keep them from paying attention in class or it has that risk. And for me, the neuroscience is what seals the deal. And I, I am very excited to support this bill and urge you to do so as well.

I motion that we favorably recommend SB 69 substitute one.

Yes. It's no secret where I stand on this issue. I am passionate about, um, balancing the use of technology in our schools, in our classrooms. There's a reason, this is back this year, and it's because the feedback is overwhelmingly positive. And it was, and the feedback is also, we should have done more because it's so good. And if there's more we can do in this area, let's do it. Um, and if, and if this good senator hadn't run the bill, I would've run the bill myself. So I appreciate him, I appreciate his hard work and for doing, um, for doing the good work. And I, I know there's some concerns with parents, but the cell phone can still be with the child. And so I think this is a really good policy and again, preserves that local control.

to the committee, uh, Representative MacPherson. Thank You Ms. Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a substitute motion to adopt second substitute.

Uh, yes please. Just shortly. So, um, what this bill, what this substitute does is provides a narrow exception for parents that would like to write a written notice to the LEA, that they, uh, need an exception. It would allow that student to continue to use their cell phone only during passing periods, lunchtime release time, or before and after school on school property. It would have to be in a manner that does not disrupt LEA operations or any other student. Um, it would not require them to receive a 5 0 4 an IEP plan in order to have this exception. Um, and, uh, the LEA may still continue to prevent, um, access to any, uh, inappropriate materials or any content that would not be suitable. And the LEA may adopt rules under the section to permit the use of these technology only in designated locations that they so choose. I think that this narrowly finds a way to preserve the core of the policy by, uh, if the state would like to set a statewide bell to bell ban, um, in place, but still provide for the minority of parents that have legitimate concerns that this would provide, um, an extraordinary barrier to some of their just standard day-to-day living. And it, right now, the options available for them is to either put their students into a, um, a special education program or to withdraw them from the public education system. I think this provides a small carve out that doesn't disrupt the entirety of the plan and still rep and respects parental rights, which I think is an important part of any of our school policies. And I would just point out too, that if you look at the national DA data and trends on this, this isn't a new thing. In 2009, nearly 91% of all public schools had banned cell phones in all public school districts. The largest public school district in the city of New York, they banned for all 1 million of their students. They, uh, by nine, by six years later, more than half of those school districts had reversed all of those policies. And so did New York City in 2016 had reversed that policy, allowing the districts to set their own individual, their schools to set individual policies. That again, changed again in 20 16, 20 17, 20 18, we kind of had a surgeon's back. Those many of those were reversed. This has data that comes from the University of Michigan that comes from UEA itself as well. This is not a new thing and a new problem. We are trying to tackle it again, but we're not learning from the problems that the other districts have, have, have dealt with is there's parental concerns here in unique situations that right now a ban is just a heavy wide tool that doesn't respect the parental, uh, ins. The, the parental rights really, they come in and in deciding in those individual circumstances where there may need to be a policy change and LEAs having the only key to turn that can make that exception is not correct. It needs to have, uh, space with parents as well to be able to turn a key and provide an option for them that they don't just have to leave the public education system. And with that, that's my motion.

Thank you. Uh, I'd resist the substitute motion, Mr. Chair. Um, uh, although I appreciate it and I've spoken with the sponsor about it, I, I think he, uh, well, he believes it's narrow. I think that it's crafted broadly enough that it addresses one of the issues that, uh, one of the people inuring public comment made. That, that it, you know, it, it, if opting out of this policy is as simple as writing a letter and then, uh, what we would expect is that, so everybody would write a letter or forge a letter with their parents' signature, and then basically we would be, uh, undermining the school's ability to set this policy. My approach on this is, I think this is handled in line 77 to 79, and I point out that contrary to the representative's assertions, we have learned from those lessons from 20 years ago that he framed this as a ban on cell phones. But of course it's not. It sets a baseline and it allows school districts to adopt whatever policy they want and to make whatever exceptions they want. And I, I think that it is, uh, incumbent on us to trust that school districts and families can work together to find what that right policy is and what the right exceptions are. Uh, so therefore, I'd, I'd resist this amendment. Although I, I understand, uh, the, you know, his reasons for making it. I have great respect for him, uh, uh, uh, as a colleague and a parent. Um, but I think that the, the way that that is drafted is too broad of an exception that really undermines the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, um, is it okay if I ask the sponsor of the substitute motion a question? Yes, you may. Okay. Thank you. So on line 100, in your proposed substitute motion, it says materially disrupt. I feel like that's a little bit subjective, but what would you mean by materially disrupt?

I, I believe that would be up to the LEA to determine, I think the, that the point here is to allow an exception to exist broadly, but then allow the LEA, the opportunity to design narrowly how to enforce it and apply it.

Okay. I'm just concerned about that term, uh, because I feel like what we're going for in this type of policy is a cultural shift in the school culture. I think that what we've seen happen over the evolution of cell phones is that there was the culture of no, nobody's gonna have any, nobody's gonna have any, we're gonna keep 'em away, keep 'em away, and then, oh, the parents kind of wanna give 'em to their kids, and these are happening, and how do we keep 'em out? Okay, maybe we embrace 'em and then, no, this is a problem, actually, whatever, we're just not gonna deal with this. Okay, now we've lost our culture, and now we're trying to fix the culture. So I feel like there's just been this like, big ride that we've been on. And, and if we, if we don't know what it really means to disrupt, and, and if they do disrupt, what could the school actually do if they do disrupt? Does the school say, uh, you gotta put that away, or do they say, you gotta give that to me, or there's just some questions I have there with that. And anyway, I, I feel like this is, this is thoughtful and I see what you're trying to do, but I'm also worried what this could do to the cultural goal of the bill if we're not really sure what materially disrupt means. And if we're not sure if, what the consequences would be if they do materially disrupt. So I, I'm struggling with that. Is there consequences that you have in mind?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I would also, uh, oppose the option or the, the substitute motion here. I do appreciate, uh, the sponsor of the substitute. I've had some really great, uh, very thoughtful conversations with him and, and found him to be very thoughtful. I'm, I'm just speaking specifically as a, as a boots on the ground. Um, and, and kinda reference back to the public comment as well is, is this makes the entire theme unenforceable, even if you tailor it out, the, the ability to, to opt out, um, we make exception or we, we, uh, make restrictions on a lot of things that students can own and carry, and whether they're 18 or 17 already, uh, that are harmful to our kids. This is not a new concept. And, uh, this is something that's, that's visible and it'd just be virtually impossible to enforce and kinda make this a non, uh, a non-issue. So I would oppose the motion.

Yeah, I appreciate, um, what the maker of the motion is trying to do. I would resist the motion. I agree that I think the concerns are addressed in the underlying bill and, um, would encourage the passage of the original, uh, substitute SB 69.

Yeah, I appreciate all this conversation. I think that, um, anytime we're crafting legislation around children and schools and freedom and rights, um, that I think that we will always err when we err against parents, um, in education. I think that's always been the theme that we have tried to learn that lesson from. And I appreciate the sponsor's conversation with me on this topic. I, I do think that if we are not going to address the real issue that exists, um, and anyone that would like to discuss more personally with me, what that issue actually looks like in an LEA that refused to, uh, respond to those needs of parents, um, I'd be happy to share that with you. But these are real, these are aren't hypothetical. These are existing current and past issues that resulted in tremendous pain and, and, and frustration on parents' parts. And we're trying to pursue, what I think has been discussed here is changing culture via legislation, which I think that, practically speaking, all of us should be ab poured, uh, the thought of trying to cr create or craft or, or change the flow of culture. We should be downstream from that. But, um, I, I support the committee, I support the, the sponsor of this bill. I understand what he's trying to accomplish. I think that this is narrow enough to allow a parent to choose. I don't think a parent generally en mass, and you're talking about thousands of kids at a school that are going to somehow convince a parent to sign and write a letter explaining why their child needs a cell phone outside of, uh, school hours. I think that even if you look at required documents that parents need to sign and fill out, those, uh, are difficult to get sometimes. So I think this is overstating, perhaps what might be the concerns that come from allowing parents to decide. And it's also narrowly crafted enough that, uh, an LEA can make those decisions, uh, individually when a parent opts out to choose how to enforce that, what that looks like. If they need to determine them to be designated to a particular, to the media center, to the office. There are places that this can be done that wouldn't disrupt school operations and that wouldn't disrupt the policy goals. So I would appreciate a vote of support for this sub.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be fast. I I'm just a little jealous that, uh, Representative Defay got to make the motion. Um, I just wanna speak very briefly to my, my, my experience. I came in as a school teacher, and the first thing, and I'm in the high school. So really we're kind of like targeting high school kids. Those high school kids, like they knew the policy. They came from a junior high and an elementary where there's no cell phones and they just expect it. And there was no big deal. And if you keep that line, they would be just fine. It's, it's, it's culture that, that allows that to change. I also ran into, uh, there's some teenagers up here with a senator, um, last week. And they said, Hey, this guy's a school teacher and he passed that cell phone bill, you know, trying to razz me a little bit. And they said, this is the best thing that happened to us. Like, we are talking to each other more. And this was unsolicited. It was not one of my constituents. And, uh, they, they were reaching, and that's what they said on, you know, on their own free will is like, we are, we are communicating better. We have better dialogue. And, and, uh, and it's great. I also like this, and I spoke before a couple years ago when this was ran, it did actually take away a lot of local control. And this preserves local control and LEA, um, and, and we've had two bills that we've actually passed outta this committee that has said, Hey, we're gonna vote for this. 'cause it gives local control. And so it is a little weird that that's something that, that we're getting hung up on a little bit when we've already made that, uh, that determination I would like to put out publicly for LEAs and, and for the public who may not understand this, A lot of times when I talk to other people, they think that this means that they're locked in pouches and that actually is not part of the bill. That's a local controlled decision, uh, or pouches on the wall. Um, so, you know, my school district, for example, you keep your phone on you. And so those are LEA decisions. They get to make those, and that is not part of the bill. And so I just wanna make sure that people, uh, understand that aspect of it. But, uh, the other pushback I had was from administration, and that was my biggest fight. It wasn't parents, it wasn't students as administration. And when we passed the bill two months into this new year, they called back and they said, Hey, Wellton, thank you for running that bill. This has been the most impactful policy that we have seen in schools in the last 15 years, and I doubted you. And this has been the best thing we've had the best return on, on investment from any policies. So, um, I appreciated that. So anyway, that's all I wanted to say. All

Uh, just real quick, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Um, I, I just wanna make a a point that I don't think we're trying to legislate culture here. I hope everybody understands that. And I want that to be on the record because that's not what we do. I I do, uh, come from a family of lots of educators, and I have yet to find one educator in my district anyway that has thought this is a bad idea. Every single teacher that I talk to has been pleading for this. Actually, they've been asking for this because our, what they're trying to do is they're trying to create an environment to educate children. And so sometimes that environment might mean a better playground set for elementary kids. Right? Well, is that, could that be construed as a cult a cultural thing, or, I don't know. I mean, that's maybe pushing the, the button a little bit. But my point is, is that, um, we, we need to provide teachers the best opportunity to teach these kids. And if they don't have the distraction of the cell phone and that we get better outcomes because of that, it's a, it's a win. And so I am totally in support of this, uh, policy, but I just wanna make sure that we're not, you know, just so the public knows we're not trying to create culture here with this bill.

It's, thank You. My, my sum is, it's six 15 or whatever time it is. 6 24. You, you are correct. All right. To the maker of the motion, I'll waive. Thank you.

Uh, Mr. Chair. I imagine we'll have some public comment on this one. Yeah. Might seems like up both of those chairs. Yeah. That this is the one that brought some, the crowd out. So I appreciate you letting me, uh, present here and moving it up early for the sake of those that are, that are here to discuss it. Um, is Emily here? My intern? Yes. Great. Have we passed? Can we pass out those flyers, Mr. Chair, with your permission? We just got, you know, we just got some content. Sure. She asked me about that for You. Alright. Um, so, uh, thank you. I'm, uh, happy to be here with this bill. You know, last year, um, this committee and, and the legislature passed, um, the initial bill that, uh, reestablished the default. And again, just for everybody's sake, I I, I wanna be clear, and I I wanna be clear this, especially for the sake of the media who are either listening or who might be here in the room. 'cause this is often called a cell phone ban, which not, um, but rather it recognizes that cell phones are ever present. If the state does nothing, then we're putting this entirely on schools to decide how are we going to limit the use of these in order to limit the damage. And so what we're trying to do here is just to reset the default and reframe the question that by, uh, by having a state default that says cell phones should not be in schools, and, and this bill would make that from the time that the morning bell rings until the time that school dismisses in the afternoon, that from that opening bell to the closing bell, that cell phones should not be used in schools. That's the state default. However, the, uh, the bill empowers school districts to craft the policy that is right for every school district, but to do so in a way that frames the question as how can we integrate this technology into our education to make it more meaningful and more helpful so that students and families can thrive? And that's the better question for school districts to be able to ask. Um, you know, this kind of crept up on us over time. Uh, in fact, the, the fact that we even call these devices phones just stems from the fact that 20 years ago, they were just phones that you carried around in your pocket, and then eventually you were able to send text messages. But they were still primarily just a communication device that you would use to go between two people. But now these devices that we call phones are in fact phones and casinos and adult movie theaters, um, uh, and televisions and radios, um, universities, uh, there, uh, there's so much that a phone can do, most of which does not belong in a school. Um, you know, Mr. Chair, the, the first place that students, that children typically encounter pornography is at school on somebody else's phone. Um, we're trying to, uh, address the issue that comes from training children's minds, um, to look at screens most of the day. Um, and this bill is only, uh, a, a part of that, you know, there are a lot of, there's some other bills, in fact, one is on our agenda later that have to do with how we're using screens and technology in the classroom in other ways. But after what we did last year, I think it's appropriate to take the next logical step, which is, uh, not to, not to do any ban of cell phones. School districts will still be empowered to, uh, allow cell phones, uh, and those devices the way that they, in the way that they think best supports their education. But to just set the default as a no, and then empower local districts to get to yes, if that's what, uh, they think is best for the education of their students. And, uh, with that, that will finish my presentation. I know there will be a lot of public comment, which, uh, we look forward to.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so when you say that each school district can create their own policy, um, I, I would like to see that there is a waiver that is required for every district to allow the parent to decide if they'd like their kid to have a cell phone. Is there a requirement for a waiver for every district?

No. Again, Mr. Chair, our, our goal is not to dictate to schools what their policy must be. Uh, it's simply to set a default and then empower them to decide what the default must, what, what their policy ought to be. And, uh, I, for one, trust school districts to be able to analyze this, to work with their teachers, with their parents, with their students, to be able to come up with a localized solution for how, what their policy ought to be and how that policy ought to be enforced.

Thank you. Um, I, for one, trust parents and parents are buying their kids these phones. So these are, um, some of my concerns. We just heard a bill about school safety that, you know, we recognize that there's a problem with violence in our schools. If you have a student that feels threatened or they feel uncomfortable at school, their phone is their lifeline. And, uh, this was brought to me by kids. I actually had a mock trial in this classroom, in this room, talking about the cell phones. And, um, kids were saying that when they feel suicidal, they feel alone. Their phone is something that they can rely on with the safe UTF to either report somebody or they can reach out to a friend and contact somebody while they're feeling lonely and, um, desperate. Uh, we also have a lot of ELL students in our schools, English language learners. These people use their phones for translation tools. They use that to talk to people that speak their same language, because sometimes they're isolated at schools. We have low income families that have parents that are both working. And when those parents are both working, they are in charge of their siblings and they use their phones to try to make sure that they can get in touch with their kids. Um, when we think about school activities, right now, when you wanna go to a football game or a baseball game, or some activity after school, it's on an app. My daughter had a smartphone and I took it away from her because she wasn't being responsible in school. She was home a lot. And I said, Hey, why are you home so much? She goes, well, I can't buy a ticket to the football game. I can't contact my friends who are playing sports because they use an app on phone to work with sports. So I didn't recognize how drastically her life would change without access to a phone, because our schools are now using so much equipment and so many apps on phones. Um, and those are just a few things. So, um, I believe that if a parent buys their kid a phone and they want their kid to have a phone, they bought it, they sent 'em to school with it. Our kids in schools are now getting burner phones and they're using those phones to leave behind, and they're putting their real phones in their pockets. Uh, I think this puts teachers, they say it's great, but teachers now become the, um, the police person in the classroom. I think that there are a lot of kids that are using their phones really wisely. I have two phones, and when somebody asks me a question and I don't understand what they ask me, I google it right away. Now, why would we take a tool like that away from our kids? Why would we disconnect them from the world when they can actually be using something really smart, using something really well when we have a small percentage of kids that aren't? So, I, I think this is heavy handed. I trust my parents, I trust my school districts, and unless there's a waiver, then I can't support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chair, may I? Yes. Yeah, go ahead. I would just direct the senator to line 74, which provides a specific exception for the use of safe ut to line 75, which provides a specific exception for, uh, IEPs and 5 0 4 plans, including those for who are English language learners. And line 78 through 79, which provides that any school district may establish any policy for any other circumstance when a student may use a cell phone. All of those, all of those concerns that she raised are addressed in the bill. And every school district is empowered to make that decision locally.

I, I, I'm just curious, is, is there something in there for kids that, that have medical devices that areti tied to their school Line? 76. Okay. Thank you. I just wanna make sure you said that.

Hi, I'm Liddy Johnson and I'm a senior at Northridge High School. And I'm also, uh, the youth Ambassador for the Child First Policy Center. And I'm here today because I've experienced school with and without cell phones. So for my first two years of high school, I did not have a smartphone. I actually had a flip phone. And during that time, I was much more focused and more present in my classes. I wasn't distracted by notifications, social media or the internet, and my tension was on my teachers and my schoolwork. And I, I learned better because of it. Um, this year I do have a smartphone, and I've already noticed a difference. Even just having a phone makes it more difficult to stay focused in class. My attention is more divided, and I see the same thing in my peers. Um, the second classes end, everybody's straight on their phones and, um, they aren't staying engaged in school. Um, a belt to Bell Van is on cell phones, is about creating, um, a better learning environment. And I support this bill because you, I've lived on both sides of having a cell phone in schools and not, and I know students learn better and the environment is better when phones aren't competing for our attention. So thank you. Thank You very much.

Terry McCabe from the Provost School Board. Um, our student board members last year were the ones that created our cell phone bill, uh, policy, and they did a really great job. Um, one thing I noticed on this particular bill, Senator Fillmore, that the effective date is May 6th. Is it possible to change it to after school gets out this school year? Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, friends. It's good to be here. Uh, Royce Van Tassel, Utah Association of Public Charter Schools, um, I think it's, uh, what Senator Phil Fillmore has, uh, suggested here is really a great opportunity for, uh, parents and schools to talk. Um, because there are some parents who say, I think, um, I want my child to have access to a phone in some ways. And there are others who have no interest whatsoever. There are charter schools, uh, where phones have been banned for 20 years and they've had a lot of kids at them, but there are others that want that. And what, uh, Senator Fillmore has said is, let's have a meaningful conversation, um, between families and, uh, schools where kids are gonna spend a lot of the day in figuring out what works best for us. And then Loa and behold, people will sort themselves based on what they see is best for their child, their family, um, this makes a lot of sense, is the next natural, uh, step. So, uh, we support the bill. Thanks.

Hi, I'm Kathleen Barlow. I'm a mother of six, a grandmother of four, and a founding member of the smartphone Free childhood us. I also recently joined the C Child First Policy Center, and I'm thrilled to be working with them to put kids health and safety first. I taught middle and high school for about 10 years till 2024, and I co curve. I'm a current sub in the Granite School District, so I'm seeing all this in real time. I have a little acronym. I'm a teacher at heart, so just to help remember, it's a ED, which is like those defibrillators. And I was thinking we need a jolt in our education system so it's appropriate. First thing, addictive technology. Okay. Persuasive design Engineers are working to keep eyeballs on screens for as long as possible. We know how difficult it is for us as adults to stay off our phones, so how can we possibly expect our kids with their still developing brains to do this? We don't expect alcoholics to carry around a drink all day and not drink them. The second one is e for experience blockers. Jonathan, he, author of the Anxious Generation, describes smartphones as experience blockers, and I could not have a more accurate description. We can't expect our students at school to focus and pay attention, engage in difficult academic content, put in the work of making friends and develop relationships with teachers when they have infinite levels of entertainment available on their frictionless phones. Of course, they'll often choose this over learning difficult skills. D is for decline in cognitive skills. Jared Cooney Horvath teacher turned neuroscientist. An author of Digital Delusion has found that Gen Z is the first generation since the late 18 hundreds to be found less cognitively capable than the generation before them. They're less happy, less healthy and less cognitively developed than their parents. Um, just to close, sometimes we hear people say that kids need, we need to teach our kids to learn to manage their phones, so they need to be on them for, to do this. I would propose that the best way we can help our kids learn how to be learn how to manage their phones is to learn, learn how to be comfortable staying off of them. Also, just as some feedback, there is a national report card that I, I have a copy for each of you. This just came out today and Utah received a d Yeah, that would be fine. So Can I, yeah, Feedback. Thank you.

Hi, I am Emily Bell McCormick with the Policy Project, and I just wanted to offer another perspective on this. We are a nonprofit that has worked on this issue for a few years, and we have been working really closely with the Utah State Board of Education on developing a basically best practices guide for the different schools. And so as districts are kind of coming across these policies and trying to figure out what Is best to do, uh, we are here to support and we are excited to support as this bill moves through as well. And wanted to just note really quickly from one local school, a couple changes that we've seen. Um, this is from Granger High School, from the principal. He said that physical altercations when they went bell to bell, were cut in half, dropping from 79 to 39. Failure rates decreased in a single quarter. Uh, the principal said we saw a significant bump in socialization during lunchtime. We saw kids reading books. We saw kids bringing board games and card games. And so for the first time in years, kids were interested in interacting with each other and not just their screens. I think if you're a parent, you see this every day of your life's. This is extremely real to our kids. And we, as the adults in this room, have this incredible opportunity to say, some spaces are just sacred and they're there for human interaction. And school should absolutely be one of those places we are in support of this bill. Thank you. Thank You.

Hi, my name is Kristen Andres. I come here as a mother of six, um, highly, uh, scared about cell phones and what it's already doing. As my 18-year-old, a senior is already turning off apps because she knows even at 18 years old that this is getting to be too much for her. I also have the opportunity to hear from tens of thousands of women on my Instagram platform that live in Utah. They are very, very supportive of this except when they have an exception and with their child. And when they learned that there were all of these exceptions that Senator Fillmore was able to put in the bill, their mind has been at ease. And when we've talked about safety concerns, it's been, uh, very apparent that our kids are actually safer without cell phones. I think we are so highly dependent and some things that have been said today, I actually think that is the problem. The problem is our kids cannot get through a two hour class or walking the halls without calling mom or dad. That is a problem. And as Emily noted, we are the adults. We must take action. This is far too late. We are years too late here in Utah. We have led the way. We must lead the way here and we must show up for our children because we have already, we're already in a bad place with these phones. So let's do better, at least when we're in school so that they can learn. And, um, I'm very supportive of this bill along with, um, many other women that I speak for. Thank you. Thank You very much.

Hi. It's good to be back here in committee with all of you. I'm Corinne Johnson, president of Utah Parents United, and we support this bill. We believe that the state has a vested interest in restoring learning as the first priority in our public education system. That is what's parents are asking for, to reclaim our schools for learning. It's not about punishment or control. This is about focus. Classrooms today are saturated with distractions, devices that pull attention away from instruction, fracture concentration, and erode the learning environment. When that happens, it's no longer just about classroom management, but this becomes a state education issue. This bill establishes an important foundational principle. If a device, whether a phone or a laptop, or a tablet or a computer interferes with learning and focus, the state has the authority and the responsibility to act. Other states have adopted strong, clear policies, have seen measurable improvements in student engagement and classroom culture. Weak or optional policies have not delivered those same results. Utah has long prided itself in educational excellence. Returning our edge means being willing to draw clear boundaries that protect learning and instructional focus. This bill is a first and necessary step in recentering our public schools around what matters most students, teachers, and learning. We urge your support.

Thank you very much. Hi, My name is Julie Jackson. I am the President-elect of the Utah School Boards Association and on the Granite School Board. I'm here today to speak for myself because neither of those bodies has voted on this bill yet, but we'll let you know how they feel because they'll be voting on it in a couple of days. I just wanted to express my own personal appreciation that, um, we have an effort here to start a conversation and to adjust a culture while trying to keep local control in place. And we appreciate that so much because we see across our district that situations are so different, um, in different places and parents want different things. And the fact that we can still, that we can begin these conversations, which we've been having in granite for three years now, and that we also can continue to let parents be in the driver's seat and teachers have a say and have these conversations. It's really huge. So I, I appreciate the attention to that and wanted to make sure to thank the sponsor of the bill for that piece of it.

Hello. Getting the technology set. Thank you. I'm Michelle Linford. Um, I'm calling in from Orem. I wish I could be there. I've been sick. So I did Dawn Myrad today in support of focused students and focused classrooms. Um, there have been amazing comments already made today, so I just wanted to add a couple of things. I I do, uh, I I reiterate the focus on learning and the, the masterful way that Senator Fillmore has crafted, um, these bills to allow for the, the agency of the agents and the, the, the, the schools, the districts and their, their constituents. Um, that said, I'm a digital wellness expert. I have been in this space for a very long time. I directed a nonprofit for 10 years. And even in a 30 year sense, I graduated with my MBA. I have in some way or another looked at the intersection point between people and technology. And it wasn't until two short weeks ago that I found the linchpin because I, I was on the fence about moving to a bell to Bella as the default. I felt that what we did last year was phenomenal and respected all of the, the nuances and complexities that people have talked about here today. But Jared Hor Cooney Reva's book, which has already been mentioned, was for me, life altering. Again, I've been in this space for a long time. I wish that we had had this data sooner, that he has made it so clear that the neurobiology of learning is incompatible with technology full stop. So it, it becomes a, to me, a as a mother and a grandmother, it becomes a little bit less to me about opinions and points of view. And, and that if we're going to have conversations, which I'm so glad we're having, we need to have the data to date. A lot of the data has been a little more subjective. This starts to get to be more objective. If you look at test scores in reading and math and other subjects across the world relative to the time spent with technology, it's astounding. I I was reading some of the, the elements of some of the book to my husband, who's a professor. He says, I need to read this because I may need to change how I do things in my classroom. So I would urge parents, teachers, administrators, legislators to read this book so that we can understand the data about the science of learning and really reclaim that learning environment. Because there are reasons that we're struggling with reading. There are reasons that we're struggling with test scores. And this is a huge one. I didn't understand that even if a, a phone is in the locker, not in the classroom, and a student can check between C, their brain is already distracted simply with the anticipatory hit that dopamine hit, they're going to get. Thank you very much. And these are things that I didn't understand. I'm sorry if there was a timer. I didn't hear it.

Yeah. I'd like to make a motion to delete, uh, entitle and Body second or Senate bill 69 and replace it with first substitute Senate Bill 69, which changes the effective date to July 1st. That's very appropriate. Thank you. And, and that just shows you, it does matter to show up to committee meetings 'cause you got a substitute right there.

Yeah, thank you. So I first substitute Senate Bill 69. I move that we favorably recommend this bill and, and I'll speak to it when we, when we sum, but that's the motion.

Uh, thank you. I appreciate that. By way of summation, I'll simply say that we passed out some, uh, statistics and some, uh, some articles from, uh, magazines and newspapers in states where a policy like this is already in place. And I would just encourage you to read the phenomenal change in school culture and in student behavior that happens when this is in place. That students still bring phones to school and they keep 'em in their backpack, but they also bring UNO cards and they play games together at lunch instead of staring at a screen and playing solo. Um, it, it really, it, it, it just makes such a phenomenal difference. It how students learn and how they interact with each other. And I appreciate your support.

I just, I'd just like to explain my vote though, because, you know, the thing that is, is I, I'd like to see this, uh, leave, leave the committee to go on the Senate floor because I think it's such a big issue for, for the schools and for the state of Utah. But I also wanted make it known that I probably will vote against this on the floor because I have a grandson that's a junior in high school and he'll probably kill me if I vote for this. So, Uh, He, he loves, he loves his cell phone more than he loves his grandpa, be honest with you. So anyway, I just, uh, wanna make that known.

Yes. I, you know, I, I'm not saying that we should have cell phones in our school and I think that's, um, a misconception when I think about all the ways that we can eliminate, um, people that are allowed to have their phones, they are addressed on line 72 to line 76. But when you think about families that are low income or come from refugee status, or come from a situation where they don't have the ability to advocate for themselves, they, they might not fit into this category. Um, I believe it's heavy handed. I believe that school districts can do this without a law. And, um, I just feel like, you know, as a democrat, small government and, uh, local control is important to me. And so I just feel this is heavy handed. And the people that might need their phones the most might not have the ability to advocate for themselves because they don't understand how to get through the school systems as well as some of the people that are here that had today off and might have a little bit more agency in their lives. So that's why I'm voting. No,

Thank you Mr. President. I think everybody remembers that last year we passed, uh, uh, a new state baseline for how school districts and charter schools should treat cell phones in schools that rather than take the position of schools are allowed in school, uh, or cell phones are allowed in school un unless a district decides to restrict them, we change that to they're not allowed during class time unless a school decides to allow them. And that was a good step in that direction, Mr. President. But it wasn't the policy that, uh, I wanted, but just the policy that I thought we could, uh, that we could get through in its first try. But since we've done that, um, many states, uh, there are 24 states in the country now that restrict cell phones during school hours. Um, and that the results academically and socially behaviorally for students and for teachers have been positive across the board. I know that Senator Vickers have read media reports and stories that, that detail the success. So, um, first substitute Senate bill 69 takes that additional and very important step, um, of, um, of setting the baseline for cell phone policy in the state. To be cell phones are just not allowed during school unless a school district or a charter school proactively allows them. Uh, this bill protects local control by really giving local school districts and charter schools carte blanche to adopt the policy that they think is right. But instead of having that policy be we are allowing cell phones in schools and then we will, uh, uh, place restrictions on them in order to try to limit the damage. What this policy sets up is a standard that says cell phones are not allowed in schools unless a district proactively allows them, because it helps to strengthen the education or behavioral environment. So there are certainly some circumstances, Mr. President, where cell phone, uh, school district may choose to allow cell phones. So for an example, an art teacher reached out to me saying that she would like her district to allow them in her art class because it helps students to be able to take pictures of things and then bring them to be able to draw. That seems like a good curricular use of this technology. But of course, we know that most of the time when cell phones are used in schools where they're not restricted, they are used for social media, for distraction, for gameplay. And in fact, I've called these things cell phones a lot during my presentation here, but of course we all know that they're not cell phones. That is one thing that they're used for. But they're used as a telephone, the vast minority of the time, instead of being cell phones, they are movie theaters, adult movie theaters, casinos, television sets, Walkmen Walkman. You know, I don't know, I'm dating myself here 'cause I'm I'm old. Um, you know, things that, things that have always been forbidden in schools and, uh, the right policy is to say casinos are not allowed in schools until, or unless a school district adopts a policy that says you can bring out your pocket casino during class if you want to. Um, adult movie theaters should not be allowed in schools. Uh, Mr. President, the most children in, uh, are exposed to pornography for the first time on someone else's phone in school. Um, and, and that's the point of this policy to allow school districts, um, to put school districts in the position where they can proactively say, consider where do we want? Where does it make sense to allow these devices in schools to allow our students and our teachers and our community inside this school to thrive? Um, and so that, that's what we're doing, I'd be happy to answer questions on the bill. Thank you for the presentation.

To the bill. Thank You. Will the sponsor yield Senator Fillmore, where you yelled yes to Senator Weiler. So, uh, and I'm sorry if I missed this, but last year's bill, which I supported and I i I plan to support this year's bill. Last year's bill preserved the local authority and control by allowing the districts to, to, to change the policy. I'm just wondering if this year's bill has that same, uh, reservation of local control. Go ahead, Senator Fillmore.

Thank you Mr. President. Yes. I'll direct the senator to lines a 81 through 82, and I'll just read it. An LEA may establish policies that extend self, uh, I'm looking at the wrong one in addition. So I'm line 77 to 78 is the right place. In addition to the exceptions described above. That is we, there are man mandatory exceptions to this rule four as are listed there. Uh, schoolwide emergencies, medical reasons for a student's IEP and then line 77. In addition to those exceptions, a district may establish a policy that provides for other circumstances when a student may use a cell phone during the school day.

Thank you, Mr. President, if I could I have one last question, and that is, go ahead. Is there any data that supports, uh, a bell to bell ban, uh, for schools?

Yes, Mr. President in our country, these are new enough that the data is a little shallow. Anecdotal data is very robust and in other countries where this is done, yes. The data showing that cell phone restrictions, uh, greatly improve student academic results, student social development and behavior.

Thank you Mr. President online. 68. It says, emerging technology at a school during school hours. Um, when you, we talk about emerging technology, uh, the definition includes robots and ai. Uh, would we be creating a policy that would not allow teachers and students to use robotics during the classroom time?

Uh, Mr. President. I don't see the term robots, uh, in the definition of emerging technology. I'll just read it out loud. That emerging technology means any other device that has or will be able to act in place of or as an extension of an individual's cell phone. I don't think that that definition includes any restrictions on a robot, although, uh, that I am sure that that would, uh, be something that we would consider if those were able to teach students in school.

Yes. Thank you for that clarification. When I looked at top emerging technologies shaping 2026, the first list is saying AI and robotics. So I was just wondering if, uh, this could be, uh, misinterpreted and we could actually be hindering our ability to use emerging technology in our classrooms. Um, uh, i, in this bill, there is, uh, policies for schools to develop a procedure for students that are, um, needing access to their phones. Uh, I, I struggle with this bill because as I was listening to the radio on the way home, uh, I was listening to a, a mom who wrote a book about a tragedy that happened in her life. And, you know, she didn't want her kids to know about that tragedy. And she didn't want her parents, our kids, to be scarred by something that happened in her past. And she said, you know, my job is not to protect my kids from danger. My kid, my, well, it is her job is to protect her kids from danger, but it's also teaches them how to mitigate danger and how to avoid danger and how to live in this world that dangers all around them. So I struggle with this bill because as a mom, my, my kids have phones and I took those phones away and I put restrictions on those phones. And I believe as a parent, I should have that right to have my kid have a phone if they are having trouble at school. There's lots of waivers in the spill for five oh fours and IEPs, but we do have kids that are struggling and when you take their phone away from them at lunch, they have no lifeline. They have no one to reach out to. And that's a big deal for me because these kids, we, we have a high rate of suicide in this nation. And I know that you have a, um, a waiver for safe ut and, um, crisis and, uh, but would that mean that parents would have to go and get a 5 0 4 so that their kid could have access to their phone? And I, I guess the question I have, is there anywhere in this bill that allows a parent to have a waiver that says, you know, I purchased this phone for my child so they can reach out to me at any time because I, I worry about their safety, I worry about their health, I worry about their mental health, and I don't wanna have to go through an app. I want them to be able to contact me. So it says that in that policy, each district would be able to make, uh, an exception for a parent that really wanted their child to have a phone.

Thank you, Mr. President. Again, I will direct the senator to line 77, which says that a district may establish a policy that provides for other circumstances when a student may use a cell phone. So I don't wanna replace, uh, the school district judgment with legislative judgment. That is a local decision that local school districts are empowered and fully capable of working out on an individual basis with parents.

Thank you. Um, this is a bill I've gone back and forth on more than, pretty much any other I've seen in a while. I support where the state's gone on this. And in recent years, I think having spent time in classrooms, it has been eyeopening to see the difference in students student behavior, uh, before the ban and, and after. Where we are at now, um, I've spoken with teachers, spoken with parents, I, I think there, there's support and feelings on all sides of this one question that came up. So, question to the, to the sponsor. Yield yielded questions He has agreed to yield. Go Ahead. Thank you. Um, what consideration was given to like, Chromebooks and, and other sorts of technologies in classrooms? I I think there were some folks I spoke with that didn't feel like this went far enough and that students would just shift their behavior over to other forms of technology. So was consideration given to that and, and, uh, how do we think that might play out if we move in this direction? Will that behavior just end up in other places?

Thank you, Mr. President. Of course. Yes. The answer is yes. That was considered. It's addressed in the bill that, um, this does not include devices that are provided by the school. Um, but, uh, kind of to the senator's, uh, kind of broader, broader point. There are, uh, other bills making their way through the legislature that address those, but this bill is largely silent on that issue.

Thank you. No follow up. I, I still dunno how I'm gonna vote on this, so thank you for the clarification.

Thank you very much. Uh, the question was asked, is there research on this? Um, I was able to talk to one of my constituents who had recently finished her dissertation on cell phones and the impact on students and student performance. Uh, her research and, and her classes and, and the university in this program all came back with the cell phones are highly de detrimental in the classroom. She recommends that they are, they be out completely. And I think that this, it's a good move to go through and limit it the way that's drafted in this bill. She would go further, but, uh, I think this bill is a great, great step forward.

Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I, the body knows I was a teacher in my, uh, younger days. Uh, and cell phones were not an issue at that point. And these days I spend most of my time in classrooms as a parent or as an invited guest. And so, you know, everything. The senator from Millcreek, he and I, um, uh, typically go, uh, to, uh, Eisenhower Junior High once a year, we're invited by their seventh grade government teacher. And over the years that I've been going to that, it has been remarkable. Granite School District has been on the forefront of this taking restrictive steps before even the state policy was in place, just to see the difference in students entering that classroom and what happens when they get there and when they sit down before the bell rings to start class. It used to be that most students would come in on their, with their phone outta their pocket on it, playing a game, sitting down and continuing to play the game. But for the last two years, since Granite Districts has implemented their policy, and then since the, our first step on this came into a place, students come into class talking to other students, and they sit down in their desks and they continue talking to other students. Uh, and that is the biggest difference that is, uh, between, you know, last year's bill, which allowed for, uh, these, uh, the, the baseline did not include these breaks between school. And that's what we're getting at. We really have taken a major step forward to address the distraction that cell phones cause in class. But this goes a step further about the distraction that cell phones cause when kids can and should be interacting with each other, um, you know, school is so much more than just sitting in a class getting, you know, hearing from a teacher and learning about the quadratic equation and things like that. It is a chance to build the interpersonal skills that come with interacting with your peers and cell phones. Largest impact on kids is the harm that it causes in the development of those vital skills. And with that, I move that first substitute Senate Bill 69.

Senator Blouin, Thank you. I feel like I need to explain my vote now. Uh, I think the exceptions granted in this bill are broad enough. I think we have seen teachers, uh, not feel supported. And this gives them an opportunity to, uh, have the support from the legislature for once as a backstop, uh, to help student behavior in their classrooms. Uh, so I, I hope this will keep us moving in the right directions and, and that if the exceptions prove to not be quite enough, we can, we can reshuffle it and figure things out. So I will be a yes.

Thank you. Uh, Mr. President, we pass this over. Had good discussion on Friday. Happy to have as much more, but as just a reminder for the body. This bill sets this, the, the default position of cell phones in school at nothing. And then empowers school districts to add cell phones back in school where they think it makes sense because it might be used in the curriculum or because kids need more screen time. Um, uh, but it allows schools to work out those, uh, those details with their parents, with their teachers, with their students, and adopt the policy that they believe is best. But they start from a position that, uh, cell phones are not in schools and will be added back in rather than cell phones need to be restricted. Uh, in that way it puts school districts and parents and, and teachers and students in a better position of, of deciding where these things belong in schools where they can facilitate academic success and social thriving. Thank you for the presentation. We had good debate on this earlier or later last week.

Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I have opposed this bill in the past, but my school districts have reached out to me. You know, my struggle is my son is 16 and he's been a great worker for years and he's a very responsible person. When he turns 16, he could drive a car, he could get a job, and then when he turned 18, I mean, he could vote. I mean, all these responsibilities our students are being asked to be a part of and we don't trust them with a device. And, you know, when I think about how we can protect our students from getting into harm's way, it's not by restricting everything they do, but it's by giving them parameters and giving them guidance. So I I still feel this bill is heavy handed. I feel as a parent that I have the best voice for what is best for my kid and watching my son be a responsible adult and, you know, work part-time, have a work study released, work with concurrent enrollment, be an active voter, um, drive a car, register for the draft when we turned the right age. I mean, this is just something that our high school kids are a part of. And, um, I wish we were educating our students to navigate these things better and, um, giving them the tools they needed to make their best choices because the rest of their life, they're going to be asked to make choices. And so, um, my, my teachers have asked me to support this bill, but, uh, I, I still struggle with it as a parent being told what I can and cannot do. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. President. I'm very happy to agree with the Senator from Cottonwood Heights, um, uh, and that this bill empowers school districts to have those conversations and to, to set up the guidelines that she's asking for. This does not, uh, require any school district to adopt any specific policy. In fact, it it, it lets them adopt whatever guidelines they feel are appropriate as they work proactively with their students and teachers and parents. And I move that first substitute Senate Bill 69 pass.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, I'm happy to be back again. Uh, some people you, lemme back up. I'll be brief on this Bill, we've, uh, discussed this. You've been lobbied quite a bit at the beginning of the session. I think we all know what this bill is, but a couple things I'd like to point out. Sometimes the wills move slowly. Uh, this bill was introduced by our good colleague, uh, from Davis County a few years ago, and I was opposed to it. Since then, I've changed. And last year we passed a policy that would, uh, disallow cell phones during, uh, instructional hours. The goal was to get it across, so it was a bell to bell, uh, ban on cell phones in order to help our students to be focused in school, to be engaged in, in the work that they're doing and to learn and to be, uh, uh, uh, resilient students ready for the world. Uh, we almost got that across the line last session, and so we're coming back this time to get it across the line. And so what this does is this goes bell to bell, which means no cell phones from the opening of school to the end of school. Uh, what this does is this states a statewide policy, or sorry, a statewide baseline. Uh, and then we add things onto it. So, for example, last session we added on, uh, the exception of five oh fours and IEPs and things like that, uh, that were reasonable, uh, carve outs and add-ons. One of the other reasons why I supported this bill is because it does allow full LEA autonomy that they can go in. And if they really say, we don't want, we want cell phones, there is nothing in this bill that prevents them from allowing cell phones anytime that they want. So this has full LEA autonomy to be able to do what they want. Um, but it does set that baseline and say that it's really important. We've passed several pieces of legislation this session that have gone through this body that talk about the importance of decreased screen time. We've talked about the importance of connection and families and all of this ties into that. And so, um, just briefly from my experience having, uh, been in the classroom and seeing this, one of the biggest fights I had last session getting this bill passed was administration. They were not wanting to be the bad guys all the time. And, uh, within two months, the administration all started calling me and saying, thank you. This is the most impactful thing we've done in education in 15 years. And I would argue that this might be one of the most important bills. Um, this policy area is one of the most important, uh, pieces of legislation that we can work on. And, uh, with that I'm open to any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield? I will. Representative Welton, will you

yield? Yes, representative.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, one question that I hear from parents in my, uh, my district is just the concern around, around being able to reach their children in the event of an emergency. Can you talk through what that might look like for parents who need to contact their children regularly, whether that's for, um, practice or even an emergency?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, I think there's a few aspects to this that we can look at. Um, I think one of the things we're the LEA has the full autonomy to do this, and that's one of the reasons why I like it. For example, in my school district, Nebo School District, um, students can have their cell phones on them. That's the preferred way in my, in my opinion, they're not locked up. They're in their backpacks, they're in their pockets. If there is an emergency, they can get ahold of their kid. Now, most things that we claim are emergencies. When I drill down with parents and say, what actually is high priority, high urgency, there are very few issues that rise to that level. I remember when I was in fifth grade, my grandpa died. It was a very hard, very tragic thing. And even during those days, within a minute or two, my parents were able to get a hold of me through the school system. Every school has a phone in the classroom. If there is something that is high priority, high urgency, parents can get ahold of their, their students like this. Now, if it's arranging, uh, uh, scheduling, uh, how do I get my kid to and from school, that can still be done. Um, but, uh, I don't know. I, I guess they come from gen Gen X where we came home and there was a sticky note on the door that said, Hey, go pick up your siblings. And, uh, somehow we were able to make it through.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just one last question. I I know another concern that's coming up from parents is, uh, there's been cases in the past where things have happened in the classroom where having a student's phone and being able to record has, um, made some of those issues public, uh, which we wouldn't have known if there wasn't a cell phone in the room. Could you just talk through why the benefits outweigh, uh, the cons here in this case? Yeah, thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, I think if you're looking on a cost benefit analysis, uh, the benefits of being engaged in classwork, focusing on your work and not having to switch back and forth, I think the studies say, takes about 10 to 15 minutes to switch back and forth. So you get a text that says, Hey, did you see what Susie did this weekend? Or whatever. And then now you're like trying to get back on track. And the loss of educational achievement is significant and very hard to overcome. Um, the, there are bad actors in education, there have been bad actors in education, but if we look at the percentage of bad actors in education versus the percentage of bad actors in law enforcement or business, or even in this body, uh, your percentages are gonna be the same. It's very, very, very small portion of, of individuals. We've dealt with those in the past. I'm not, I I don't think that that's a, a greater risk in, in today than it was before. But I think it would also fit under the, um, the emergency, uh, safety of a student that actually has a carve out, uh, in the bill. That if you think that there's a, an issue of safety and this is one that you could argue is an issue of safety, then there's protections for that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yeah, thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, I think if you're looking on a cost benefit analysis, uh, the benefits of being engaged in classwork, focusing on your work and not having to switch back and forth, I think the studies say, takes about 10 to 15 minutes to switch back and forth. So you get a text that says, Hey, did you see what Susie did this weekend? Or whatever. And then now you're like trying to get back on track. And the loss of educational achievement is significant and very hard to overcome. Um, the, there are bad actors in education, there have been bad actors in education, but if we look at the percentage of bad actors in education versus the percentage of bad actors in law enforcement or business, or even in this body, uh, your percentages are gonna be the same. It's very, very, very small portion of, of individuals. We've dealt with those in the past. I'm not, I I don't think that that's a, a greater risk in, in today than it was before. But I think it would also fit under the, um, the emergency, uh, safety of a student that actually has a carve out, uh, in the bill. That if you think that there's a, an issue of safety and this is one that you could argue is an issue of safety, then there's protections for that.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support. Um, I think the work we did last year, uh, really spoke to how important this is in our children's education, and I am proud of all the work that's happened and what the sponsor has done to make progress. The reason it's back this year is because we've had such success, um, in schools, and schools are asking us to broaden the policy. So I am really appreciative. I know that this will be so impactful for our students, and I encourage you all to vote for the bill.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Motion to adopt Amendment one.

Yes, I would. So, Mr. Speaker, I've worked, um, a long number of hours with both the good floor sponsor and with the Senate sponsor on this bill. And, uh, working together with them identified, um, a potential, um, amendment here that would allow or actually would require an LEA to craft a policy around those circumstances that I think have been brought up here a couple of times. There's, uh, situations sometimes I spoke with a woman in St. George, whose, uh, husband had died and their, uh, son was in high school. He is a freshman. The only chance, uh, that he has to go to school right now, even though he's, uh, having a very hard time with his dad dying, is that he's in constant contact with his mother between classes and at lunch. Um, and, uh, there's individuals in some of my schools and districts that, uh, they don't have parents at home. And the oldest, uh, child typically picks up the middle children from, uh, different schools from, uh, junior high schools. And, uh, they typically have to coordinate their schedule because of sports and other things. This just simply says that in an instance where a parent has a unique situation, that a school shall design a policy around how they can briefly go to the office and use their cell phone outside of instruction time, um, and in a way that wouldn't material deed disrupt, uh, school operations or any other student. It's a pretty simple amendment and I hope that the body will support it.

Yes, I, I appreciate, uh, my good colleague from West Valley City. We've worked really hard on this and, and he's brought up some very, uh, uh, meaningful concerns. Um, there has been a little bit pushback, and I just wanna explain this a little bit. There's some concern that this will create like a smoker's lounge. Uh, I would argue that if an LEA were to act in that way, they could do that already and they would be doing that already. So I'm not, I don't share the concerns that some others have, and I consider this, uh, uh, friendly.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to rise briefly in, in support of this bill. I, as a school teacher, have this conversation constantly with my students. Every day, my sixth graders bring in their cell phones, they turn 'em in at the beginning of the day. I lock them up, safe and sound in the cabinet. I give them back at the end of the day. Uh, and, and life goes on. I, I, I don't believe that when we say that, uh, this is implementing a cell phone ban, that that's, that's the right way of describing it. When you go onto a plane and you put your your bags into the overhead bin, that's not a luggage ban. That's just a place where you store luggage while you're, while you're on this journey in the classroom. The, it's a, it's a journey towards better understanding toward knowledge toward learning. And cell phones get in the way oftentimes and distract from that, that work that's being done in the classroom. So I think that putting in common sense, uh, places where, where phones can be not only kept, but also, uh, reserved for the times when parents and students through collaboration with their administrators and districts can determine that they can indeed use those is, is a sensible way of, of returning greater focus and, uh, learning to the classroom. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield Representative Welton, will you yield? Yes. Yes. Representative V Listen, Uh, thank you. Um, for the past decade, I've been on the safe UT commission and was also part of the school safety task force. Those two, uh, groups worked very hard over the past, uh, year to, to craft, uh, additional technology that is now built into safe ut that is invisible to the student. But if there is a school, you know, tragedy like a school shooting, that technology immediately goes live. Pushing notifications to every student in the school, gathering realtime information about, uh, where a potential shooter may be. Um, uh, opens up two-way communication, which in the study in the past school shootings has been one of the biggest, uh, barriers to quickly, uh, ending the, the, the situation. Can you speak to how, what, what would it mean for that technology? If students don't have access to their, their phones, it's to some degree, uh, during the school day.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, that piece is actually addressed last year and is still in the bill, um, from the, from the original bill. Whether this passes or doesn't pass, uh, the access to use safety safe ut during the crisis line is described on line 74, uh, in the current bill. Um, so that would not change. Um, I would say this, uh, while we have LEAs choice, um, this is just a statement to the LEAs out there who might be listening. I, I'm not, uh, in favor of things like yonder pouches that do make it difficult in case of emergency for a student to access, but I also recognize they're local control. Uh, but that is a, an LE decision as to like how they're used. There is nothing in the bill that says they have to be locked up or they have to go into cubbies or anything like that. Um, so they would still have access to their phones safe. UT is still a carve out in the bill. Um, and so I don't see that as being a, a conflict. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, of all Senate bills that I've seen, this is probably one that I like the least. Uh, it absolutely oversteps the local school boards. I don't, I don't have a, a dog in the race as to whether or not the, uh, phones are allowed in classes or not, but, uh, but I do believe that local elected school boards should be the ones that make the decision. I remember this bill last year coming through saying it specifically will not overstep the school boards. And then here we are this year saying this will specifically overstep the school boards. I encourage you to kill this Senate bill. It is, it is not good policy. It oversteps the local elected officials. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, with all due respect to the representative from somewhere in central Utah that just spoke, um, there are some policies that are so important that as a state we need to choose them. And I believe this is one of those policies. Um, lots of teenagers are great and they know how to interact and they know how to have conversations and they have good social lives, but there are a lot that do not. And that is largely due to technology and social media. And if we as a body are doing what we can to help them succeed and help them be functional adults, we need to pass this bill. So I'd ask for your support.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, just a couple items. First of all, I would agree with, uh, uh, my good representative from Salt Lake Valley. There is nothing in this bill that prevents an LEA from acting on their own. Uh, as a teacher, that is something that, uh, that is really important to me. And one of the reasons why I opposed the original version of the bill three years ago, and I'm full support right now. We have passed at least two other bills right now that give, uh, local authority that actually have a few more restrictions. There is nothing that would prohibit an LEA from a 100% opting out and making a policy that we want to have cell phones every day. They can do that. They don't because they understand that that's good policy. But if that's a concern in your area, I recommend that you go to your LEA and encourage them to act accordingly. There is nothing that prevents an LEA from acting, uh, in policy that meets their, their, uh, that they choose on. So in closing, let me just say this. I agree. Uh, this is one of the most important bills that we've had. This creates focus students, engaged students, present students and resilient students. And that's what we want for our children. I encourage a favorable vote.

Mr. President, thank you. Uh, the house, uh, made a small change here to ensure that students that needed to call home during the school day could come to the office and do that on their cell phone rather than using the school's phone. I move to Concur.

Yeah, we're just right there. We have, well I have three over there. Okay.

Senator Balderree Lewin Aye. Brammer Bus Comore. Escamilla. Aye. Fillmore Aye. Grover Aye. Harper Aye. Kins. Aye. Ipson Ary. Aye. Johnson Aye. Quan McKay? Aye. Mikel Milner. Musselman Owens Pitcher Aye. Plum Rebe Aye. Stand. Stevenson Stratton Bickers Miler Aye. Wilson Winterton, president Adams First substitute Senate Bill 69 Having received 19 na votes zero nay votes, 10 being absent passes Senate be returned to the house for the signature of the speaker.