Fairfield Cops To Speak Out Against Police Reform Bill

FAIRFIELD, CT — Fairfield police and other area officials on Monday will share “serious public safety concerns” about a sweeping police reform bill that is working its way through the state legislature, according to a department news release.

The Fairfield Police Department invited residents and members of the media to join law enforcement 4 p.m. outside the Reef Road station, where town police will be accompanied by law enforcement from across Fairfield County as well as state legislators who oppose the bill, and other local leaders.

"While police officials generally do not speak about legislative matters, given the sudden and rushed nature of this legislation we feel the need to express our concerns regarding this bill," Fairfield Chief of Police Christopher Lyddy said in the news release. "We ask that community members consider joining us on Monday in a show of solidarity."

The state House of Representatives passed the bill, known as HB 6004, by an 86-58 margin Friday morning after a long and passionate overnight debate. The state Senate is scheduled to consider it this week. The bill is being considered after protests against racism and police brutality were held over the course of several weeks in Connecticut and across America following the death of Minnesota man George Floyd in the custody of Minneapolis police.

The Fairfield news release specifically referenced the bill’s proposed inspector general position, ability for towns to create civilian police review boards, changes to police protocols, and elimination of certain protection for officers and municipalities.

The government immunity section of the bill proved to be the most contentious during House deliberations, as municipal officials worried it would open them up to more lawsuits stemming from police actions and increase liability insurance. Under the bill, a government immunity defense could only be used if a, "… police officer had an objectively good faith belief that such officer's conduct did not violate the law."