SALT LAKE CITY—A bill that adds to legislation from the 2025 Session regarding cellphones in schools has passed and is on its way to the governor’s desk to be signed. SB69 School Device Revision, sponsored by Sen. Lincoln Fillmore, R-Salt Lake, calls for a “bell-to-bell” policy prohibiting the use of cellphones from when the first bell rings until the last bell when school ends. It will be the state’s default policy but preserves the option for the Local Education Agency (LEA) to set its own device policy.

Gov. Spencer Cox introduced the bill right before the session, touting the importance of the policy to promote more learning in the classroom and to encourage connection between students if they don’t have their phones.

“I am convinced more than ever that a bell-to-bell cellphone ban is the single most important thing that we can do for our students in our schools today,” Cox said at the time.

The Policy Project, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization has been a supporter of the legislation. The group acts as a policy accelerator to “do real good for real people.”

“The Policy Project was involved last year during the 2025 Session,” said Lindsay Butrum, Policy Implementation Manager for The Policy Project. “We see this year’s work as just a continuation of SB178 passed last session. We believe that having clear expectations for students, administration and for teachers benefits the school environment.”

This isn’t about taking phones away, she said. “It’s about giving students an opportunity to focus, to connect with each other and to learn. That’s why we believe this is a really important piece of legislation setting that statewide default.”

The research base is still emerging, but across states and countries, the pattern is consistent: meaningful improvements in student engagement, school climate, and educator satisfaction occur when expectations are clear and applied consistently throughout the day, said Butrum. “Just as important as the rule itself is how it is implemented,” she said. “Schools that succeed involve students in shaping the ‘how,’ create clear exceptions for emergencies, learning and medical needs and build feedback systems between students, families and educators.”

Butrum said in partnership with the Utah State Board of Education, The Policy Project has developed a statewide toolkit with best practices, implementation guidance and sample policy language to help schools implement these policies thoughtfully and consistently.

SB69 is making the implementation easier, she said. “Classroom-only rules do put teachers in constant enforcement battles. They’re constantly having to remind them. So when phones are just not in the equation it becomes that much easier for administrators and students because they know that’s the expectation.”

There has been some push back from parents who feel like it’s too restrictive, said Butrum. “We’ve heard that and the amendment that was passed is in direct response to that voice, parents saying ‘we want an option.’ In some cases there could be circumstances where it does make sense for a student to be able to have the ability to be in communication with a parent that maybe doesn’t fit within those other exceptions.”

So there is a piece of this that does include a request for accommodations, she said. “The policy isn’t trying to cut off students from their families. It’s to make sure that there is a structured, appropriate communication opportunity and students aren’t just back and forth all day communicating but are still available if there is a need or an emergency.” 

It’s up to the school to have this conversion to say exactly how this can be structured, but setting that default at the state level is really valuable, she said. 

Butrum said a Washington County educator whose faculty implemented a bell-to-bell policy together last year shared that student resistance was far lower than expected, parent concerns were minimal and that creating a distraction-free learning environment felt like one of the greatest gifts they had given their students. They said, “We just wish we had done it years earlier.”