District-wide cell phone policy prohibiting use approved by SPPS Board of Education Tuesday
The St. Paul Public Schools Board of Education approved a cell phone policy for students Tuesday prohibiting their use during school hours that it will implement this fall.
Districts across the state are adopting district-wide policies on cell phone use since the Legislature mandated them last year. The deadline for districts to set school board-approved policies is March 15.
The policy states that the use of personal electronic devices will not be permitted during school hours and must either remain at home, in lockers or turned off and put away. It includes cell phones, tablets, laptops, smart watches, gaming systems and earbuds.
'There is no such thing as a perfect policy, but I do think that we're at a point where we've crafted something that answers the original question that we had of, how do we enact this law in a way that is as equitable as it can be, and rooted in the understanding that technology is here and not going away, as well as bringing in as many stakeholders as we can,' said Chair Halla Henderson.
The majority of SPPS schools already do not allow the use of cell phones during the entire school day, according to the district.
Currently no SPPS elementary schools allow cell phone use during the school day and most middle schools don't allow their use either.
Board members did discuss allowing the use of smart watches — some elementary students use them to navigate their way to and from school.
For the majority of high schools, some use of cell phones, such as during lunch, is permitted.
As part of the approved cell phone phone policy, schools can develop their own documented plans with school stakeholders for grades 9 and above that must be reviewed annually.
Schools could then decide for those grade levels to allow cell phone use before and after school, between class periods or during lunch, but must have an objective of reducing their use. Electronic devices still would not be permitted during class periods, in bathrooms or in locker rooms.
Schools often share updates on cell phone practices in back-to-school materials, said Jodi Danielson, SPPS director of schools and learning and facilitator of the district's cell phone policy workgroup, last week.
'So that's really where parents will be able to hear about and plan for any changes that they might experience at their school,' Danielson said.
According to the policy, staff will refer to the Student Rights and Responsibilities Handbook when responding to policy violations. This can include students losing the privilege to bring devices such as cell phones to school.
Legislation introduced in January would require that school districts' cell phone policies, starting in the 2026-2027 school year, prohibit cell phones and smart watches for students in kindergarten through eighth grade and prohibit them in classrooms for students in grades 9 through 12. It allows some exceptions, such as students with medical conditions requiring monitoring or students with individual education plans or other exceptions set by the principal.
Implementation planning for the new policy is expected to happen through the spring and summer, according to Danielson. The policy begins district-wide on Sept. 2.t
See the full approved policy available on the SPPS website by going to spps.org/about/board-of-education/2025-meeting-materials.
The policy can be found by going to the Board of Education section and selecting the Feb. 18 BoardBook.
Education | St. Paul Public Schools Board: New superintendent to start May 12
Education | SPPS Board of Education to vote on cell phone policy Tuesday
Education | St. Paul, other big districts cancel Tuesday classes because of cold weather
Education | St. Paul Public Schools cancels school, after-school activities Tuesday due to weather
Education | Confirmed case of pertussis/whooping cough in St. Paul school district
Education | St. Paul Public Schools Board: New superintendent to start May 12
Education | SPPS Board of Education to vote on cell phone policy Tuesday
Education | St. Paul, other big districts cancel Tuesday classes because of cold weather
Education | St. Paul Public Schools cancels school, after-school activities Tuesday due to weather
Education | Confirmed case of pertussis/whooping cough in St. Paul school district
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Yahoo
Lawmakers still split over data privacy policy as bill advances to floor
Republican Rep. Rachel Henderson of Rumford (middle) discusses her data privacy proposal with Judiciary Committee analyst Janet Stocco (left). (Emma Davis/ Maine Morning Star) Members of the Judiciary Committee late Friday advanced one of three proposals to better protect data privacy in Maine with the hope that the effort to rein in the reach of Big Tech would not founder as it did last year. Before voting against her own bill, Rep. Rachel Henderson (R-Rumford) told the Judiciary Committee Friday afternoon that she thinks the best chance the Legislature has to get a comprehensive data privacy law passed this year is for there to be just one plan for the Maine Senate and House of Representatives to consider. 'To me, it's not about having a bill in my name,' Henderson said. 'It's about the policy. Transparently, it took me a while to get there. I've got an ego too.' However, that decision does not mean lawmakers agree on what the right policy is. That will still be worked out in the chambers. For the sake of procedure, the committee opted to advance just one of the bills, but the competing components of the plans will still have the opportunity to be considered as majority and minority reports. As Henderson put it, 'I would hate to see happen this year what happened last year.' Legislature rejects paths to a comprehensive data privacy law in Maine Last session, after a dozen public meetings, countless hours of behind-the-scenes work and sizable lobbying influence from Big Tech, the Legislature rejected two competing data privacy bills on the last day, during which floor speeches demonstrated confusion over the various differences in the bills. The fundamental differences between last year's legislation — namely how companies approach the collection of user data — could not be reconciled. The plans being considered this year, which lean heavily on last year's proposals, still have those key differences, so whether a resolution can be reached this year will remain to be seen. The main disagreement is how to approach a standard called data minimization, which broadly means limiting the collection of personal information to only what is necessary to fulfill the consumer service. The legislation the majority of the committee advanced, LD 1822 sponsored by Rep. Amy Kuhn (D-Falmouth), uses this approach. It specifically would limit the collection of personal data to only what is reasonably necessary and proportionate to provide a specific product or service requested by the consumer. The key reason business interests at the public hearing opposed this bill was because they were concerned it would prevent them from doing targeted advertising. While Kuhn built her bill off of one of the versions last year that was favored by privacy advocates and opposed by businesses, she altered it to ensure small businesses that have to stretch their advertising dollars can access ad exchanges, which are marketplaces where companies can buy and sell advertising. On Friday, Maine Assistant Attorney General Brendan O'Neil said, 'I don't see a restriction on targeted advertising in the bill.' Henderson's bill, LD 1088, which the majority of committee rejected, would use a notice and consent model, allowing companies to collect data as long as consumers agree to it in privacy notices. Earlier in May, the committee rejected a similar bill, LD 1224, to narrow down the number of competing proposals. These two bills are similar to the version last session that was favored by businesses, who argued for Maine to adopt a law that is consistent with those adopted by other states. There is currently a patchwork of state laws and parts of federal legislation governing the current landscape, as there remains no one federal law regulating internet privacy, despite several proposals. But more than a dozen states have modeled their laws off one first passed in Connecticut, which is the basis for LD 1088 and LD 1224. However, Connecticut's attorney general has since recommended that its state Legislature amend the law to strengthen data minimization provisions rather than rely on its current 'exploitable' notice-and-consent model. Reading from the Connecticut report released in April, O'Neil said, 'They start out by saying that, in many cases, serious privacy and data security concerns could have been offset, if not fully alleviated, if companies had properly minimized the data they collected and maintained. That's really what LD 1822's data minimization standard aims to do.' Maryland passed a law last year that is similar to Kuhn's proposal, marking a departure from the years-long trend of states following what privacy advocates see as Connecticut's watered down model. Maine's full Legislature will now decide between these two versions of a data privacy law. The committee voted 7-1 against LD 1088, with Rep. Adam Lee opposed, but his minority report was to strike and replace the bill with Kuhn's bill. Six members were absent for the vote. The committee also voted 7-1 in favor of LD 1822, with Henderson opposed. Her minority report is to strike and replace the bill for her bill language. Six members were again absent for the vote. Essentially, these minority reports afford lawmakers avenues to take up the versions as they see fit but, the committee hopes, without the confusion of competing bills like last year. With the possibility of changes coming to Connecticut's law and waiting to see how Maryland's law works in practice, lawmakers also prepared to have a vehicle to use should Maine pass a law and then want to amend it based on lessons learned from other states. A concept draft, LD 595 sponsored by Judiciary Committee co-chair Anne Carney (D-Cumberland), will be carried over into next year, which currently reads that it could 'further update certain consumer privacy laws in response to recent developments in federal and state consumer privacy laws.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
30-05-2025
Colorado's governor vetoes landmark ban on rent-setting algorithms
Democratic Gov. Jared Polis has vetoed a bill that would have made Colorado the first state to ban landlords from using rent-setting algorithms, which many advocates have blamed for driving up housing costs across the country. RealPage is the target of a federal lawsuit filed last year that accuses the real estate software company of facilitating an illegal scheme to help landlords coordinate to hike rental prices. Eight other states, including Colorado, have joined the Department of Justice's lawsuit, though RealPage has vehemently denied any claims of collusion and has fought to have the lawsuit dismissed. Critics say RealPage software combines confidential information from each real estate management company in ways that enable landlords to align prices and avoid competition that would otherwise push down rents. RealPage's clients include huge landlords who collectively oversee millions of units across the U.S. The Colorado bill, which recently passed the Democratic-led Legislature along party lines, would have prevented the use of such algorithms. In a veto letter Thursday, Polis said he understands the intent of the bill but that any collusion among landlords would already violate existing law. 'Reducing market friction through legitimate means that do not entail collusion is good for both renters and landlords,' Polis wrote. 'We should not inadvertently take a tool off the table that could identify vacancies and provide consumers with meaningful data to help efficiently manage residential real estate to ensure people can access housing.' In a statement, RealPage applauded Polis' veto, calling it an example of 'courageous leadership.' 'This is the right outcome for all of us who desire a healthy housing ecosystem that benefits Colorado renters and housing providers alike,' said Jennifer Bowcock, a spokesperson for the Texas-based firm. But Polis' decision outraged local housing advocates and the American Economic Liberties Project, a consumer rights advocacy group that has helped lead the fight against RealPage and other companies that use rent-setting algorithms. 'This veto sends the devastating message that corporate landlords can keep using secret price-fixing algorithms to take extra rent from people who have the least,' said Sam Gilman, co-founder and president of the Community Economic Defense Project, a Colorado-based nonprofit. RealPage software provides daily recommendations to help landlords and their employees price their available apartments. The landlords do not have to follow the suggestions, but critics argue that because the software has access to a vast trove of confidential data, it helps RealPage's clients charge the highest possible rent. Although Colorado was the first state to pass a bill targeting rental algorithms, at least six cities have passed similar ordinances over the past year. They include Philadelphia; Minneapolis; San Francisco; Berkeley, California; Jersey City, New Jersey; and Providence, Rhode Island. RealPage has decried those measures and sued over Berkeley's ordinance, saying it violates the company's free speech rights and is the result of an 'intentional campaign of misinformation and often-repeated false claims' about its products. RealPage argues that the real driver of high rents is a lack of housing supply. It also says that its pricing recommendations often encourage landlords to drop rents since landlords are incentivized to maximize revenue and maintain high occupancy. A clause recently added to Republicans' signature ' big, beautiful ' tax bill would ban states and localities from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade. On Tuesday, five Democratic senators sent a letter to RealPage asking if the company was involved in getting that clause inserted.
The Hill
30-05-2025
- The Hill
Colorado's governor vetoes landmark ban on rent-setting algorithms
Democratic Gov. Jared Polis has vetoed a bill that would have made Colorado the first state to ban landlords from using rent-setting algorithms, which many advocates have blamed for driving up housing costs across the country. RealPage is the target of a federal lawsuit filed last year that accuses the real estate software company of facilitating an illegal scheme to help landlords coordinate to hike rental prices. Eight other states, including Colorado, have joined the Department of Justice's lawsuit, though RealPage has vehemently denied any claims of collusion and has fought to have the lawsuit dismissed. Critics say RealPage software combines confidential information from each real estate management company in ways that enable landlords to align prices and avoid competition that would otherwise push down rents. RealPage's clients include huge landlords who collectively oversee millions of units across the U.S. The Colorado bill, which recently passed the Democratic-led Legislature along party lines, would have prevented the use of such algorithms. In a veto letter Thursday, Polis said he understands the intent of the bill but that any collusion among landlords would already violate existing law. 'Reducing market friction through legitimate means that do not entail collusion is good for both renters and landlords,' Polis wrote. 'We should not inadvertently take a tool off the table that could identify vacancies and provide consumers with meaningful data to help efficiently manage residential real estate to ensure people can access housing.' In a statement, RealPage applauded Polis' veto, calling it an example of 'courageous leadership.' 'This is the right outcome for all of us who desire a healthy housing ecosystem that benefits Colorado renters and housing providers alike,' said Jennifer Bowcock, a spokesperson for the Texas-based firm. But Polis' decision outraged local housing advocates and the American Economic Liberties Project, a consumer rights advocacy group that has helped lead the fight against RealPage and other companies that use rent-setting algorithms. 'This veto sends the devastating message that corporate landlords can keep using secret price-fixing algorithms to take extra rent from people who have the least,' said Sam Gilman, co-founder and president of the Community Economic Defense Project, a Colorado-based nonprofit. RealPage software provides daily recommendations to help landlords and their employees price their available apartments. The landlords do not have to follow the suggestions, but critics argue that because the software has access to a vast trove of confidential data, it helps RealPage's clients charge the highest possible rent. Although Colorado was the first state to pass a bill targeting rental algorithms, at least six cities have passed similar ordinances over the past year. They include Philadelphia; Minneapolis; San Francisco; Berkeley, California; Jersey City, New Jersey; and Providence, Rhode Island. RealPage has decried those measures and sued over Berkeley's ordinance, saying it violates the company's free speech rights and is the result of an 'intentional campaign of misinformation and often-repeated false claims' about its products. RealPage argues that the real driver of high rents is a lack of housing supply. It also says that its pricing recommendations often encourage landlords to drop rents since landlords are incentivized to maximize revenue and maintain high occupancy. A clause recently added to Republicans' signature ' big, beautiful ' tax bill would ban states and localities from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade. On Tuesday, five Democratic senators sent a letter to RealPage asking if the company was involved in getting that clause inserted. RealPage did not immediately respond to a request for comment regarding the letter.
