Committee Summary for House Education Policy and Administration (05/20/2025)

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
SB206 2249H 00:28:52.239 - 8:55:28 AM	Executive Session	requiring public schools to adopt policies to limit the use of cell phones by students.	Ricciardi, Denise(R)[C-]2024
SB96 2199H 01:08:33.279 - 9:35:09 AM	Executive Session	relative to mandatory disclosure by school district employees to parents.	Lang, Timothy(R)[C+]2024
SB33 01:31:22.399 - 9:57:58 AM	Executive Session	relative to the regulation of public school materials.	Avard, Kevin(R)[C+]2024
SB211 01:33:30.840 - 10:00:06 AM	Executive Session	relative to biological sex in student athletics.	Avard, Kevin(R)[C+]2024
Unclear 01:36:04.240 - 10:02:40 AM	General Working Session	Unclear

SB206 2249H: Representative Lichfield Support00:28:52.239 - 8:55:28 AM; Representative Lichfield introduced amendment 2249H to Senate Bill 206, emphasizing the need for a law to limit cell phone use in schools due to its impact on student mental health. They highlighted that over 90% of educators see student mental health as a serious issue, with cell phones, social media, and bullying being major contributing factors. Teachers and administrators have requested legislative action to implement a policy that removes the burden of policing cell phones from educators.
SB206 2249H: Representative Terry Support00:31:05.199 - 8:57:41 AM; Representative Terry supported the amendment, noting a nationwide movement towards addressing the issue of cell phone usage in schools. They mentioned that many states are taking legislative or executive action to curb this problem, indicating a growing recognition of its severity.
SB206 2249H: Representative Hall Information Only00:32:20.560 - 8:58:56 AM; Representative Hall inquired about exceptions in the amendment for instructional needs, specifically if teachers could use cell phones for educational purposes. They noted that the amendment does not currently allow for such exceptions but mentioned a potential future amendment to include teacher-led instruction as an exception.
SB206 2249H: Representative Murray Information Only00:33:33.520 - 9:00:09 AM; Representative Murray raised concerns about the term 'personal communication device' potentially including laptops brought in by students due to a lack of school-issued devices. They questioned whether this could limit the use of such devices for academic purposes, suggesting flexibility for districts to allow these devices.
SB206 2249H: Representative Shell Oppose00:35:55.840 - 9:02:31 AM; Representative Shell opposed the bill, arguing it was overly prescriptive and diminished local control. They believed that school districts should have the autonomy to develop their own policies regarding cell phone use, tailored to their specific needs and resources. They mentioned the differences in needs between districts like Newcastle and Manchester, and the financial disparities affecting device provision.
SB206 2249H: Representative Woodcock Information Only00:37:54.800 - 9:04:30 AM; Representative Woodcock expressed mixed feelings about the bill. They recognized the need for addressing cell phone usage in schools due to mental health concerns but stressed the importance of local control. They suggested that a small caveat for teacher-led instruction could make the policy more viable and reasonable.
SB206 2249H: Representative Freeman Support00:40:49.239 - 9:07:25 AM; Representative Freeman supported the bill, noting that teachers and superintendents have come to the legislature because their current policies are ineffective. They mentioned a significant number of inappropriate internet accesses on school devices, underlining the need for legislative action to help schools manage cell phone usage effectively.
SB206 2249H: Representative from Winthrop Information Only00:45:21.199 - 9:11:57 AM; The Representative from Winthrop shared a personal anecdote about their grandson's experience with a bell-to-bell cell phone policy in Massachusetts, indicating that students can still find ways to circumvent such rules. They acknowledged the historical challenge of student compliance with school policies.
SB206 2249H: Representative Hall Information Only00:48:19.679 - 9:14:55 AM; Representative Hall suggested that the committee consider an amendment to include an exception for instructional use, indicating that such an amendment was not yet available but should be discussed before voting on the bill.
SB206 2249H: Representative Lynch Information Only00:49:22.719 - 9:15:58 AM; Representative Lynch sought clarification on whether the proposed amendment would include teacher-led instruction, expressing a desire to discuss an exception for this type of instruction immediately.
SB206 2249H: Representative Lichfield Information Only00:50:42.560 - 9:17:18 AM; Representative Lichfield expressed confusion over the distinction between instruction and teacher-led instruction, questioning who leads the class if not the teacher.
SB206 2249H: Representative Dry Information Only00:50:42.560 - 9:17:18 AM; Representative Dry explained the difference between instruction and teacher-led instruction, emphasizing that teacher-led instruction implies direct control by the teacher over the activity, such as using cell phones in class, and suggested that the amendment should be at the teacher's discretion.
SB206 2249H: Representative Murray Information Only00:51:47.480 - 9:18:23 AM; Representative Murray questioned the necessity of distinguishing between teacher-led and student-led instruction, suggesting that student-led learning with an educator present might still fall under teacher-led instruction and expressed concern over the specificity of the amendment's language.
SB206 2249H: Representative Baloney Information Only00:51:47.480 - 9:18:23 AM; Representative Baloney suggested that the term 'teacher-directed' might be a compromise for the amendment, indicating it could be a common ground for the committee.
SB206 2249H: Representative Pedell Information Only00:52:48.719 - 9:19:24 AM; Representative Pedell raised concerns about equity in access to technology, questioning how teacher-led instruction could be implemented if not all students have access to the same technology, such as cell phones.
SB206 2249H: Representative Hall Information Only00:53:37.920 - 9:20:13 AM; Representative Hall clarified that any exception for cell phone use would require superintendent approval, ensuring that the decision considers whether all students have access to the necessary technology.
SB206 2249H: Representative Noble Information Only00:53:37.920 - 9:20:13 AM; Representative Noble requested a brief caucus to discuss the amendment further.
SB206 2249H: Representative Cornell Oppose01:02:57.840 - 9:29:33 AM; Representative Cornell expressed support for the bill's concept of prohibiting cell phone use from bell to bell but could not vote in favor without an exception for teacher-led or teacher-directed instruction, citing the potential limitation on educational activities like photography classes.
SB206 2249H: Vote on Amendment 2249H Vote01:05:41.920 - 9:32:17 AM; The committee voted on Amendment 2249H with the following results: 9 yays, 8 nays, and 1 not voting.
SB206 2249H: Vote on Ought to Pass as Amended Vote01:06:59.760 - 9:33:35 AM; The committee voted on the motion to pass the bill as amended with the following results: 9 yays, 8 nays, and 1 not voting.
SB96 2199H: Representative Cordelli Support01:08:33.279 - 9:35:09 AM; Representative Cordelli moved to pass Senate Bill 96, which requires educators to respond to written inquiries by parents about their students. He expressed overall support but had reservations about a section requiring educators to refer cases to DCYF if they believe answering a parent's inquiry might result in abuse.
SB96 2199H: Representative Cordelli Information Only01:09:25.760 - 9:36:01 AM; Representative Cordelli proposed Amendment 2199H to replace the section of the bill that required referral to DCYF, arguing that an opinion without evidence should not justify involving DCYF with the family. He read the replacement section, allowing school districts to adopt policies on this matter.
SB96 2199H: Representative Terry Information Only01:11:36.719 - 9:38:12 AM; Representative Terry expressed appreciation for the language in the amendment, specifically the sentence from line 11 to 12, which allows parents to inquire about documented decisions under state law. He noted that this would be a rare occurrence but is included as a safeguard.
SB96 2199H: Representative Cordelli Information Only01:12:53.360 - 9:39:29 AM; Representative Cordelli clarified that the amendment uses language from an existing RSA, passed last year, which prevents school board policies from instructing educators not to respond to parent inquiries. He responded to a question about the specific student record, stating it refers to the student's record in the school office, not a teacher's personal file.
SB96 2199H: Representative Woodcock Information Only01:13:41.040 - 9:40:17 AM; Representative Woodcock raised concerns about the amendment's reference to 'student record', questioning whether it pertains to records in the classroom, guidance counselor's office, or the principal's office. He sought clarification on whether a teacher's personal notes would be part of the record that stays in the school.
SB96 2199H: Representative Celig Oppose01:15:42.880 - 9:42:18 AM; Representative Celig strongly opposed the bill, arguing that it undermines the trust and relationship-building between parents and their children. She highlighted potential issues with the five-day response time requirement and emphasized the importance of respecting children's need for a trusted adult outside the family.
SB96 2199H: Representative Dry Information Only01:16:35.599 - 9:43:11 AM; Representative Dry clarified that the amendment refers to five school days, not calendar days, which would account for holidays and weekends. He also noted that if a trusting relationship exists, educators could use the exception provided in the amendment.
SB96 2199H: Representative Cornell Information Only01:17:33.120 - 9:44:09 AM; Representative Cornell expressed confusion about how a teacher should respond to a parent's inquiry if they believe disclosing information could harm the child. He questioned whether the teacher could simply note the issue in the student's file without responding directly to the parent.
SB96 2199H: Representative Belony Information Only01:18:38.719 - 9:45:14 AM; Representative Belony questioned the specifics of what information needs to be disclosed to parents under the amendment. He used an example of a child mentioning a parental fight and asked if such information would need to be disclosed if it did not meet the criteria of abuse, abandonment, or neglect.
SB96 2199H: Representative Cordelli Information Only01:19:50.880 - 9:46:26 AM; Representative Cordelli emphasized the importance of trust between parents, children, and educators. He stated that the legislation encourages parents to build a relationship with their children and not to break down trust by keeping secrets.
SB96 2199H: Representative Belony Information Only01:21:50.240 - 9:48:26 AM; Representative Belony asked if a teacher could suggest to a parent that they discuss a specific incident with their child, without disclosing details, to meet the requirements of the bill. He sought clarification on whether such an approach would be sufficient.
SB96 2199H: Representative Freeman Support01:23:12.319 - 9:49:48 AM; Representative Freeman supported the bill, arguing that it was necessary because there have been instances where teachers withheld critical information from parents. He provided an example of a child expressing suicidal thoughts, which was not communicated to the parents, leading to a potentially avoidable situation. He emphasized the bill's purpose in allowing parents to inquire about their child's welfare.
SB96 2199H: Representative Cornell Information Only01:25:30.640 - 9:52:06 AM; Representative Cornell clarified that reporting suicidal thoughts to parents is already mandatory and part of current educational practice. He emphasized that no bill suggests withholding such information from parents.
SB96 2199H: Representative Pernell Information Only01:26:40.560 - 9:53:16 AM; Representative Pernell sought clarification on whether the inquiries referenced in the bill are limited to written inquiries, not casual or verbal ones.
SB96 2199H: Representative Woodcock Oppose01:27:43.120 - 9:54:19 AM; Representative Woodcock argued that the bill originated from issues related to LGBTQ students coming out and criticized it for potentially violating students' rights. He suggested the bill was not in the best interest of the students.
SB96 2199H: Representative Belony Information Only01:28:56.800 - 9:55:32 AM; Representative Belony highlighted the 'One Trusted Adult' program in schools, which encourages students to discuss issues with educators in confidence. He expressed concern that the bill could undermine this program's effectiveness in addressing student mental health needs.
SB33: Representative Terry Information Only01:31:22.399 - 9:57:58 AM; Representative Terry moved to retain SB33, citing the need for further work on the bill due to time constraints.
SB33: Representative Lichfield Support01:31:22.399 - 9:57:58 AM; Representative Lichfield seconded the motion to retain SB33 and concurred with Representative Terry's view on the need for further work.
SB33: Representative Balony Oppose01:32:38.680 - 9:59:14 AM; Representative Balony opposed the retention of SB33, arguing that the bill should be killed and not proceed further, advocating for an Inexpedient to Legislate (ITL) motion.
SB211: Representative Freeman Information Only01:33:30.840 - 10:00:06 AM; Representative Freeman moved to retain SB211, citing the need to wait for a court decision on a related House bill, HB1205, which deals with the same subject matter.
SB211: Representative Selig Oppose01:34:38.160 - 10:01:14 AM; Representative Selig opposed retaining SB211, arguing that the bill should be killed as similar laws have been found unconstitutional and discriminatory in other jurisdictions.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only01:36:04.240 - 10:02:40 AM; The speaker outlined the upcoming schedule for the committee, mentioning that they will be discussing SB100 related to the prohibition on teaching discrimination and SB210 concerning a study committee on bullying. Hearings for these bills are scheduled for Tuesday the 27th, with three of the bills to be heard in the morning and all four to be executed in the afternoon. Additionally, there are non-german hearings on amendments for SB57 and SB69, and an amendment to SB210 which is considered a substantial change and thus requires a hearing.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only01:36:59.439 - 10:03:35 AM; The speaker continued to discuss the schedule, confirming the timing of the hearings and executions for the bills mentioned previously. They also mentioned a need to discuss Senate bills to be acted upon on Thursday and to go over the speakers for two bills to be discussed in the House session on Thursday.
Unclear: Unidentified Speaker Information Only01:37:45.359 - 10:04:21 AM; The speaker addressed inquiries about the availability of amendments and confirmed that some amendments are still being worked on but will be included in the calendar. They also discussed the timing of a meeting with the assistant and the distribution of minority reports for SB96 and SB206, both of which are ITL (Inexpedient to Legislate).

Cordelli, Glenn(Chairman)(R)[A-]2024	Drye, Margaret(Clerk)(R)[A-]2024	Noble, Kristin(V Chairman)(R)[A+]2024
Cornell, Patricia(D)[CT]2024	Freeman, Lisa(R)[B+]2018	Hall, Muriel(D)[CT]2024
Terry, Paul(R)[A]2024	McDonnell, Valerie(R)[B+]2024	Selig, Loren(D)[CT]2024
Balboni, Peggy(D)[CT]2024	Murray, Megan(D)[CT]2024	Tenczar, Jeffrey(R)[B+]2024
Litchfield, Melissa(R)[A-]2022	Woodcock, Stephen(D)[CT]2024	Kluger, Lee Ann(D)
Snodgrass, Jim(D)	Morse, Bryan(R)	Nadeau, Brian(R)