Still Water School Board Advances Bell-to-Bell Cell Phone Policy
The Still Water School Board moved toward adopting a comprehensive cell phone restriction policy during its February 4 meeting, with most directors supporting a "bell-to-bell" prohibition for all grade levels.
The board reviewed two options for high school students under the required personal electronic communication devices policy, which must be adopted by March 15 per state mandate. Option one would prohibit device use from the start to end of the school day, while option two would allow use during passing periods and lunch.
Student representatives Anley and Mason supported the stricter bell-to-bell approach, citing concerns about student engagement and school culture. "Students will find a way to have their phone regardless," Anley said, noting that designated storage areas would be more effective than partial restrictions during instructional time.
The policy discussion followed extensive community engagement, including surveys of students, staff and families. Superintendent Dr. Funk noted the district took a more collaborative approach than many districts that simply adopted policies without community input.
The board also heard a presentation from Lily Lake Elementary Principal Granda, who highlighted the school's Communication Integration Program for students with autism and strong academic progress following COVID-related declines. The school serves 387 students with 29% receiving special education services, significantly higher than the district average due to the specialized program.
Our proprietary artificial intelligence agent analyzed publicly available documents including meeting agendas, minutes, and transcripts to write this story to help inform local residents. Feedback helps us improve, so please consider rating how we did with the thumbs up or down below.
Go deeper on this topic
Research related meeting documents and build a brief — without rewriting the story.
Full analysis
Votes (2)
First Reading: Policy 505 - Distribution of Non-School Sponsored Materials on School Premises by Students and Employees
Dissent: None
The policy committee presented Policy 505, a new MSBA model policy addressing free speech rights for students and employees while maintaining educational objectives. Key points included definitions of prohibited materials (e.g., obscene, libelous, disruptive) and the process for administrative review. Board members raised questions about potential conflicts with the existing identity harm protocol and whether a power differential between students and staff should lead to different policies.
First Reading: Policy 54.5 - Personal Electronic Communication Devices
Dissent: Director Laow expressed leaning towards Option 2; Director Parker raised several implementation concerns that would need to be addressed.
This policy, a state legislative mandate, aims to limit personal electronic devices (PEC devices) in schools to improve student behavior, mental health, and academic attainment. Options were presented for high schools: 'Bell to Bell' prohibition (Option 1) or prohibition only during instructional time (Option 2), with elementary and middle schools adopting the 'Bell to Bell' approach. Student representatives largely favored Option 1 due to mental health benefits, improved school culture, and increased engagement. Board members leaned towards Option 1, acknowledging implementation challenges and the need for clear procedures, while some expressed caution about navigating life with phones.
Notable Quotes (7)
The purpose of this policy is to protect an exercise students and employees Free Speech rights taking into consideration the educational objectives and responsibilities of the school district.
If it's not in that c in fall into one of those categories it would be okay which seems like there are some categories of overlap of what's okayed by this that might cause some consternation on identity harm protocol so that's a question want to think about and then second is is there a power differential between um a student handing something out or posting something and a teacher handing something out and posting something and should that be considered should there be a different policy or should those entities be treated differently
So I think doing prohibiting them during instructional time would be most beneficial because they're not on their phone when they actually need to be learning and educated
Our personal opinion is kind of the option one Bell to Bell just kind of gone for the day and just focus on learning and getting an education and just being engaged with school and I think that would also um improve our culture a little bit better just a school culture
I have a note from my doctor saying I need to have my cell phone on me because of the anxiety that I have and so it's that's some of the things that we are going to have to be if if we go to the Bell the Bell Route that's another thing that will pop up that we will be having to do guaranteed
Excess smartphones any studies that you look at you know among youth is linked to increased anxiety depression hindrance to academic instruction and learning and other mental health issues but yet we have an opportunity and the responsibility as a school board to do what we feel is best for students and and for me I I think it's important to um you know and I'll be supporting option one for the Bell to Bell
I would love for that to be in place and to work will it work so do we need to just give it a little bit um of room a kid going between Class phones are part of life now when I went to school we didn't have phones so sure we we could get by without phones but it wasn't an option uh but now everybody has phones and there's also a part of learning to navigate life with a phone because that will be part of your adulthood and if you have them in passing time hopefully you won't use it but you might need to put an assignment on your calendar um or quick look up something for class the next hour
Ordinances & Resolutions (14)
Minor modification to a current policy, passed on consent agenda.
Minor modification to a current policy, passed on consent agenda.
New MSBA model policy regarding the distribution of non-school sponsored materials on school premises by students and employees, presented for first reading.
Existing district protocol raised for potential conflict with Policy 505 regarding offensive materials.
New policy regarding personal electronic communication devices, mandated by state legislation, presented for first reading and board direction on high school options.
Documented plan for students with disabilities, identified as a potential exception to the personal electronic communication device policy.
Federal law providing accommodations for students with disabilities, identified as a potential exception to the personal electronic communication device policy.
Plan for students with medical conditions, identified as a potential exception to the personal electronic communication device policy.
A book referenced by a board member during the discussion on the impact of cell phones on student mental health.
The district's strategic plan, referenced as a guiding 'North Star' for policy decisions, particularly regarding student well-being and engagement.
A long-term evaluation tool mentioned for measuring the effectiveness of the personal electronic communication device policy.
Proposed state legislation requiring science-based reading instruction and expanding teacher/para-professional training.
Proposed state legislation modifying parental curriculum review rights and requiring written consent for sexual education.
Existing state law with proposed amendments to allow unlimited remote participation in government meetings with fewer restrictions.
Source document
Was this story helpful?
Other Topics from This Document
Lily Lake Elementary School Presentation
Federal Programs Update
State Legislative Update
Also from this meeting
Want to know when new stories arrive?
Enter your email to receive updates.
We will not use your email for any other purpose. You can unsubscribe at any time.