Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Comfort Dog Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Uxbridge policy subcommittee advances comfort-dog policy to full committee
Summary
The policy subcommittee reviewed a revised comfort-dog policy that defines the handler as the school resource officer, requires certification or an approved plan to certify the dog, and adds protocols for handler absence; the draft was moved to the full committee for a first reading and passed by voice vote.
The Uxbridge School Committee policy subcommittee on June 5 reviewed a revised comfort-dog policy and voted to send the draft to the full committee for a first reading.
Committee members said the draft, adapted from a submission by Chief Mahoney, clarifies definitions and operational expectations. The draft explicitly names the handler for the joint program between the Uxbridge Police Department and Uxbridge Public Schools as the school resource officer and says the district will require a current certification for a comfort dog or an approved plan, subject to superintendent approval. "The handler for this joint program between Uxbridge Police Department and Uxbridge Public Schools is the SRO," a presenter said during the meeting.
Members discussed several operational details: a provision that the handler maintain control of the dog (generally via a leash), how that requirement applies on fenced playgrounds, and whether language allowing discretion when a leash would interfere with the dog's safe and effective performance is adequate. The committee also added a short protocol for extenuating circumstances if the handler must leave the dog temporarily.
There was a focused exchange about classroom participation and student accommodations for those who opt out or cannot participate. A teacher on the panel objected to language that might be read as requiring a separate "alternative learning experience" for excluded students, saying individualized accommodations such as private exposure or guidance-counselor sessions are typical practice. The presenter said the policy language was intended to preserve flexibility and to direct principals and the superintendent to avoid disrupting instruction.
A motion to move the comfort-dog policy draft to the full committee for a first reading was made, seconded and approved by voice vote of those present. The subcommittee did not adopt the policy on June 5; it advanced the draft for consideration by the full School Committee.
