– Page 43 –

The DSBN and Warren Hoshizaki’s Cell Phone Policy

43.1 Before we discuss this issue, I believe it is important to point out that once a student reaches high school, they are allowed to use their cell phones in the corridors, on school grounds and in the classroom when the teacher is not present. If a student has finished all of their work and has nothing else to do, it can also be permitted in the classroom. Outside of being in a classroom, phone use is essentially not monitored.

43.2 Let’s now discuss the DSBN and Warren Hoshizaki’s cell phone policy at DSBN schools.

43.3 Reviewing the DSBN very own policy on cell phones states

Read More – DSBN G 26 Use Of Mobile Devices By Students

43.4 The District School Board of Niagara (DSBN) recognizes that students may have in their possession personal mobile devices. This policy governs the acceptable use of personal mobile devices by students while at school or at school related activities.”

a) Was the applicant using his phone in an “acceptable” manner? YES!
b) Was the student at “school or at school related activities?” NO!

43.5 As classes had not begun, thus the applicant was not in class, he was not at “school or at school related activities.”

43.6 Do you know how frequently school staff goes out side after school is over to prevent students from using their phones? NEVER!

43.7 Why? Because in their minds the students are NO LONGER deemed to be at “school” depart at the end of the day, and get outside the exit doors. Hence the same logic and behavior also applies before classes begin.

43.8 Despite having said that, the policy still permits students to use their cell phones “while at school or at school related activities” as long as they do so in an “acceptable” manner, which the applicant was. So even if the applicant was to be regarded to be present at “school,” his phone use was still “acceptable.”

43.9 “The District School Board of Niagara (DSBN) recognizes that students may have in their possession personal mobile devices. This policy governs the acceptable use of personal mobile devices by students while at school or at school related activities.”

43.10 So either way the applicant was entitled to use his cell phone to look for music.

43.11 Next… “It is the policy of the DSBN that personal mobile devices are allowed where they are deemed not to interfere with personal learning or the learning of others and will only be used under supervision in the elementary setting.”

a) By the applicant using his cell phone did it “interfere with personal learning or the learning of others and will only be used under supervision in the elementary setting?” NO!

43.12 As they were again standing outside on the public/common area, the concrete pay area before school started. This statement clearly implies that if any student wishes to use their phone within the school walls, or in a classroom. It cannot interfere with others student’s ability to learn and must be done with the permission and supervision of the teacher. No teacher was teaching outside before school officially started and no student was learning. This does not apply.

43.13 Next…”Circumstances where mobile devices may be permitted for use include educational purposes as directed by the educator, health and medical purposes, or to support special education and mental health needs.”

a) Again this only applies if the students wish to use their phone within the school walls, in a classroom or during class activates. Again as the applicant was outside before school officially start. This does not apply.

43.14 Next… “They are not to be used in elementary or secondary schools in private areas such as locker rooms and washrooms nor are they to be used where it may interfere with the reasonable expectation of privacy or safety of staff, students, or others.”

a) Does not apply as the applicant was outside in a public/common area, the concrete pay area before school started and not in a private area as described by the policy. This does not apply.

43.15 Next… “The electronic transmission or posting of photographic images of a person or persons on school property, at school events, and during school activities and/or hours, is prohibited without the permission of the person or persons being photographed, the administrator or designate, and where the student is below the age of 18, the consent of the parent/guardian.”

b) Does not apply because the applicant was not photographing anybody or posting anything. This does not apply.

43.16 Next… “School administrators shall share information on appropriate use of mobile devices and hold students accountable for complying with these guidelines. School staff shall determine what, if any, use is interfering with the learning or intruding on another’s reasonable expectation of privacy and implement restrictions and consequences consistent with policy G-08 DSBN Code of Conduct for schools.”

c) There was absolutely no reason for Jacqueline Ravazzolo and S. Masterson to think that the applicant was “interfering with the learning or intruding on another’s reasonable expectation of privacy” at 8:45 a.m. which is 20 minutes before school even officially started, while standing outside in a public/common area, the concrete pay area. This does not apply.

43.17 And as Jacqueline Ravazzolo and S. Masterson could not and have never held the applicant accountable for not complying with these phone guidelines at any time. It is obvious that the applicant never violated this DSBN cell phone policy.

43.18 Then perhaps the DSBN, Warren Hoshizaki, Jacqueline Ravazzolo and/or S. Masterson could clarify exactly what was so improper about the applicant using his phone outside, while others around him did the same thing in full view of vigilant Jacqueline Ravazzolo and S. Masterson?

43.19 There was absolutory no school regulation regarding cell phones being enforced by Jacqueline Ravazzolo and S. Masterson at the time. They were hunting and targeting the applicant, the Black student! They were trying to impose their own personal agenda and impose their own will upon him while ignoring the other Caucasian students who were also using their cell phones directly in front of them and surrounding area.

43.20 Keep in mind that there was also a Caucasian female student using her mobile phone twice while standing four feet away from the applicant when S. Masterson bullied the applicant both times that cell phones are not permitted on school property.

43.21 Remember that Jacqueline Ravazzolo intentional walked outside to find and single out only the applicant from the group of four, to try and intimidate and bully him in an attempt to unlawfully take his phone while delivering a demanding threat for him to go to the office. At the time this same Caucasian female student had her phone out and in plan site in her hand.

43.22 And the following scenario begs the question. Why was it that Kevin Maddalena, the applicants’ homeroom teacher, was will to be abruptly and unexpectedly added to the mix? And why did Kevin Maddalena want to participate, exactly?

43.23 This sequence of events is really intriguing as it appears that Jacqueline Ravazzolo and Kevin Maddalena seem to be conspiring, working in tandem to enforce Jacqueline Ravazzolo unjustifiable and unlawful behavior against the applicant and his phone.

43.24 Recall that on November 2, 2022 Jacqueline Ravazzolo gave a revised, false and contradictory version of her encounter with the applicant in the school hallway in response to her racist behavior. And after repeated requests from the parents to Kevin Maddalena on his take of the encounter. Jacqueline Ravazzolo now again decided on the spur of the moment to suddenly now include Kevin Maddalena in the conversation more than a year after the fact.

43.25 In Kevin Maddalena, Jacqueline Ravazzolo seems to have found a companion and ally. Someone who will go to great lengths to protect her, even if it means lying. That sounds like a lot to ask, and it might be that there is more going on in this relationship than first meets the eye. Since Kevin Maddalena’s is always willing to aide Jacqueline Ravazzolo in regards to her interacts with the applicant, one has to wonder whether there is some sort of personal relationship going on here?

43.26 Additionally, it looks like Kevin Maddalena is more than willing and eager to get involved either because he wants to aid Jacqueline Ravazzolo in refuting the claims made by Black applicant, even if he was not present both times.

43.27 And/or because they both work in alliance to keep trying to make the applicants time at the school so unbearable, that he wants to leave or maybe transfer to another school. This is what ultimately occurred.

43.28 There is no justification for Jacqueline Ravazzolo to include Kfrom Kevin Maddalena. Why?

43.29 Is Jacqueline Ravazzolo stereotyping the Black applicant as a troublemaker and a potential irate Black Man? So she needs to enlist the help of a Caucasian male teacher to speak with the applicant?

43.30 He we go with another – One Hand Washes Another scenario!

43.31 Whatever their motives, in a later discussion we’ll speak about how Kevin Maddalena continued to brazenly harm and poison his relationship with the applicant for no apparent reason other than to support his superior Jacqueline Ravazzolo. It seems that Kevin Maddalena has gone out of his way to hinder the applicant’s education, mistreat him and tarnish his name and character in order to keep in good favor with his supervisor Jacqueline Ravazzolo and Mary Anne Gage.