Uxbridge subcommittee prepares draft comfort-dog policy, schedules first reading

Members of the Town of Uxbridge policy subcommittee spent the meeting shaping a draft animals-in-school policy that would govern use of comfort and therapy dogs in school buildings. Ben presented a compiled draft drawn from neighboring districts and said it starts by distinguishing therapy and comfort dogs from ADA-covered assistance animals, "because we have the prerogative to not have a therapy dog if we want to, but an ADA assistance dog, we cannot."

The committee discussed core elements to include in the policy: clear definitions for "therapy animal," "handler," and "therapy team"; procedures for approving non-SRO comfort animals; a recurring exception many towns use allowing school resource officer (SRO) dogs to operate before a final external certification; and documentation requirements. A member recommended annual documentation verifying vet checks, active licenses and any ongoing training, along with a log of which days and which spaces the dog visited.

Members also addressed notification and workload. One committee member asked whether principals must notify families and staff every time a dog is present; Ben said that if the SRO is on his normal schedule, "I don't think he would notify anybody in advance," and that advance notice would be required for additional comfort dogs beyond routine SRO visits. The group proposed a short, signed building-use form or agreement, completed and revisited periodically, to set where crates are kept and which spaces are off-limits.

The committee discussed how to accommodate students or staff with allergies or cultural reasons not to touch animals. Options included keeping dogs out of specific classrooms, arranging interactions during noninstructional times, and consulting parents about exposure preferences. A member emphasized protecting individual privacy, noting the need to avoid disclosing health information that could identify a student or staff member.

On logistics and continuity, the subcommittee agreed a backup plan should list district personnel who could care for the dog’s basic needs if the designated handler is called away; the backup's duty would be animal welfare only, not classroom handling without the certified handler present.

Next steps: Ben agreed to move the draft into the shared drive so committee members can comment and to incorporate suggested edits. The group aimed to present the draft as a first reading at the full school committee meeting on Tuesday with a potential second reading in May. The subcommittee also agreed to revisit the policy’s implementation during the first year on a quarterly basis.