New York Assembly Bill A06388

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/4/25
• Refer: 3/4/25
• Refer: 1/7/26
• Report Pass: 1/12/26

Caption

Requires the inclusion of local and municipal animal shelters, any duly incorporated society for the prevention of cruelty to animals and veterinary services when establishing local comprehensive emergency management plans; requires that information to the public include the communication accommodation needs of persons with vision or hearing impairments and information on which temporary housing and other necessary facilities are designated as animal-friendly.

Impact

The bill would amend the Executive Law to specifically address the coordination of disaster response involving animals, a significant enhancement over existing laws that do not fully account for the welfare of animals in emergency situations. This expansion of emergency management plans is expected to improve local responsiveness to disasters, ensuring that both pets and livestock can receive necessary care and accommodation during crises. By establishing partnerships with local animal shelters and veterinary services, the bill promotes collaboration among various organizations to achieve a unified response to disasters, ultimately aiming to minimize harm to both people and animals.

Summary

A06388 is a bill proposed in the New York Assembly that aims to enhance local comprehensive emergency management plans by requiring the inclusion of local and municipal animal shelters, societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, and veterinary services. The bill seeks to integrate animal welfare considerations into emergency planning, ensuring that both human and animal needs are addressed during disaster response. By mandating that emergency management plans account for the care and housing of animals displaced during emergencies, the bill reflects a comprehensive approach to public safety and disaster preparedness.

Contention

While the bill has garnered support from animal welfare advocates and organizations emphasizing comprehensive emergency preparedness, there may be concerns about resource allocation and the logistics of implementing these new requirements. Critics might argue that local governments may face challenges in integrating animal management into existing emergency plans, especially in areas with limited funding or resources. Furthermore, the bill's implications for local governance and the necessity of involving additional stakeholders in the emergency management process could spark debates about the feasibility and practicality of these initiatives.