(February, 1965, P.A. 575, S. 5; 1967, P.A. 669; P.A. 77-289; P.A. 81-426, S. 3; P.A. 82-357, S. 3, 8; P.A. 87-99; 87-560, S. 2; P.A. 91-186; P.A. 92-128, S. 1, 2; P.A. 93-271, S. 1, 3; 93-435, S. 1, 95; P.A. 94-44, S. 1, 2; May Sp. Sess. P.A. 94-6, S. 10, 28; P.A. 95-108, S. 4; P.A. 00-51, S. 1, 2; P.A. 01-195, S. 13, 181; June 30 Sp. Sess. P.A. 03-6, S. 169; P.A. 05-200, S. 1; P.A. 07-151, S. 2; 07-217, S. 22; Sept. Sp. Sess. P.A. 09-7, S. 32; P.A. 11-51, S. 147; 11-61, S. 154; 11-233, S. 2; 11-251, S. 1; P.A. 12-80, S. 189; P.A. 13-144, S. 3; 13-190, S. 1; P.A. 14-131, S. 1; June Sp. Sess. P.A. 15-2, S. 2.)
Cited. 13 Conn.App. 124. Subsec. (a): Former Subdiv. (10) does not establish explicit, well-established and dominant public policy that, irrespective of or in limitation of collective bargaining agreement, a town has control over termination for fitness for duty of a police officer. 255 Conn. 800.