The union that represents Hartford police officers is challenging the authority of the city's Civilian Police Review Board, arguing it should have a more limited role overseeing law enforcement.
In a complaint filed earlier this year, the Hartford Police Union accused city officials of violating state labor laws when they strengthened the board in 2020.
City councilors and the mayor vested the board with additional powers, including the ability to take police misconduct cases to binding arbitration.
The changes came amid a nationwide push to reform criminal justice in the wake of George Floyd's killing by a police officer in Minneapolis.
The city now faces a test of its civilian oversight system, which will shape the community's role evaluating conduct by police.
The Civilian Police Review Board (CPRB) voted last year to send two cases to arbitration, marking the first time the process has been invoked. After a lengthy delay, city officials finalized a framework late last month for the process to move forward.
The union contends that process violates its contract. It says the labor agreement outlines a disciplinary procedure that supersedes the authority of the board.
"The third-party outside arbitration is illegal," said Sgt. James Rutkauski, president of the union. "We have our own arbitration within a disciplinary process that the union has agreed with."
Mayor Arunan Arulampalam's office did not provide an on-the-record comment about the legal dispute.
Members of CPRB's executive board said in an interview they're confident the arbitration process will be upheld.
"I think we're definitely at a crossroads, and again, we're trying to do everything we can to move full steam ahead," said Andrea Hartman, the board's acting chair.
Decades of friction
Hartford's civilian oversight board dates back more than three decades, and its existence has been marked by repeated questions about its authority.
Councilors established the board in 1992 over objections from the police union, installing five civilians and two police representatives to hear citizen complaints. It replaced an Investigative Review Board that had been created 10 years earlier, but was widely viewed as secretive and ineffective.
City leaders aimed to make the process more transparent amid growing concerns over police brutality. Nationally, the beating of Rodney King by police in Los Angeles had sparked outrage. Locally, Hartford officers were twice videotaped striking people in handcuffs, the Hartford Courant reported at the time.
Tension with the police union was present from the outset. Large numbers of off-duty officers regularly attended the board's first meetings, sometimes shouting jeers from the audience, the Courant reported. In one chaotic confrontation, the board chair ejected the president of the union and its lawyer from a hearing.
The board lacked formal authority to press for tougher sanctions, operating only as an advisory body. Officers were required to attend meetings, but were not compelled to testify or provide evidence. The police chief also was not obligated to follow the board's recommendations.
In one 1999 news report, a councilman said the board had all the power of a "bowl of wet macaroni."
New powers, old obstacles
Former Mayor Luke Bronin and members of the City Council significantly strengthened the board in 2020, drawing on new state legislation that authorized subpoena power for civilian review boards.
The city also created a full-time inspector general position and granted the board the ability to take police misconduct cases to arbitration.
Now composed of nine commissioners, the board investigates allegations such as excessive use of force in parallel to the Hartford Police Department's Internal Affairs Division. It renders independent judgments, which it sends to the police chief.
If the chief declines to sustain a charge the board has sustained, the board can refer the matter to arbitration.
That provision long went unused, due in part to missteps by city officials in administering the CPRB's operations. Amid a series of transitions in the inspector general role, the board's findings weren't transmitted to the chief.
The problem was fixed after the city named longtime criminal defense attorney Joseph Lopez as inspector general in late 2024. However, the CPRB remains unable to exercise some powers the city granted more than five years ago.
During a special meeting in November 2025, Lopez said the board has no clear path to enforce subpoenas in the judicial system, and faces continued challenges from the union.
Lopez called on the mayor and City Council to take action.
"Many people have worked incredibly hard to bring us to where we are today, and that work certainly deserves recognition," said Lopez, who previously served as director of the complex litigation unit in the Office of the Chief Public Defender.
"But at the same time, the sobering truth remains that five years after that ordinance was strengthened, the board has yet to achieve the meaningful impact and genuine accountability that City Council intended," he said.
First cases move forward
A pair of citizen complaints may now lead to disciplinary action against Hartford police officers. Commissioners voted in June and August 2025 to send two matters to arbitration.
In one, a citizen filed a complaint after officers responded to a 911 call reporting a domestic disturbance at his apartment in September 2024. The man claimed an officer unlawfully broke down his front door to arrest him, and raised concern about how he was treated after he was taken into custody.
The board found the officer was justified in forcing entry into the home, but faulted him for his behavior toward civilians who were present. Commissioners sustained a charge of conduct unbecoming of a police officer.
The other case centers on how officers handled an incident that unfolded in the parking lot of a Mobil gas station in August 2024. A citizen was assaulted and his bicycle was damaged during an altercation with several young men. The board found three officers failed to thoroughly investigate what occurred. It sustained allegations of neglect of duty against all three.
Complaint could unravel the process
The Hartford Police Union has raised numerous objections to the board's work, including a labor complaint that could derail the arbitration process.
The union represents full-time uniformed and investigatory members of the police department, up to and including captains.
It previously agreed to allow the inspector general to observe internal affairs interviews — a compromise intended to prevent the need for investigatory subpoenas.
But the union has since backed away from the deal, according to the inspector general, stalling two cases last year because the board lacked access to question the officers.
In a December 2024 letter to the city's corporation counsel obtained by Connecticut Public, a lawyer for the union proposed reforms to the board. Officers under investigation have no right to counsel or union representation, and cannot present evidence, cross-examine witnesses or make opening or closing arguments, the lawyer argued.
"As a result, there is a strong belief that one-sided presentations are being presented and officers are left with adverse findings that they strongly disagree with and are unable to properly defend," the letter states.
In a new complaint filed Jan. 8, the union alleges the city engaged in practices prohibited under the Municipal Employee Relations Act when it empowered the CPRB to initiate arbitration.
The union contends the arbitration provision constitutes a unilateral change to its contract that requires collective bargaining.
The State Board of Labor Relations is scheduled to hear the case April 1-2.
The city is expected to argue the arbitration process doesn't conflict with the union's contract because its scope is limited. An arbitrator would only decide whether a charge is sustained while the chief retains discretion over specific disciplinary measures.
A department under scrutiny
The controversy comes amid ongoing calls from Hartford residents for police and city leadership to be more responsive to the community.
Police killings this year of two Black men experiencing mental health crises have sparked sustained outcry.
Community advocates were also critical of the mayor last year over the selection of a new police chief. A coalition of groups based in the city's North End called for citizens to have more influence in the process.
Arulampalam's first pick for the position abruptly withdrew his name from consideration after misconduct allegations filed against him with the Philadelphia Police Department came to light.
Arulampalam has since installed James Rovella — the state's former public safety commissioner and a former Hartford police chief — to lead the department on an interim basis.
Two views of oversight
Rutkauski, the union president, said in an interview that having outside accountability for the department is important, but he believes the city should rewrite the municipal code to restore the CPRB to its previous role as an advisory board.
Hartford police maintain high professional standards, he said, as evidenced by decreasing citizen complaints and accreditation through the Connecticut Police Officer Standards and Training Council and Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies.
Rutkauski noted that the CPRB typically agrees with internal affairs findings, adding that its investigations are largely duplicative. He questioned whether the board merits its current level of funding.
"There isn't a smoking gun," Rutkauski said. "When was the last time ... they dug something up and went, 'Oh my goodness. The Hartford Police Department tried to bury this'? We don't have that type of environment. It doesn't exist."
The board received 61 citizen complaints last year. Some were withdrawn or fell outside the board's jurisdiction, and others are still pending. Of the resolved cases, the board sustained allegations in seven, involving nine officers.
Members of CPRB's executive board said the cases moving to arbitration were chosen because the underlying facts aren't in dispute, and because the police department's internal affairs report failed to address conduct the board found problematic.
Claude Mayo, one of the CPRB's executive board members, said the inspector general has asked city councilors to revise the city ordinance to clarify the board's powers and ensure its decisions hold weight.
Mayo also encouraged more people from the community to participate by showing up to meetings and sharing their opinions.
"We truly believe in the work that we're doing, and we want to be able to do it the best way possible," he said.
Editor's note: Arunan Arulampalam's father-in-law is Gregory B. Butler, who is a member of the Board of Trustees of Connecticut Public.
