During an all-day hearing Friday, police and local officials pushed back against a provision in a sweeping police accountability bill that would eliminate officers’ existing protection from civil lawsuits related to their official duties.

They said the changes to what’s known as qualified immunity could allow damages against individual officers and would mean that officers would need to carry personal liability insurance. That would significantly impact the ability to recruit and retain officers, police leaders said.

Former state police Sgt. Andrew Matthews, who is now retired and heads the state police union, predicted that some officers would retire or resign “for fear of being sued,” adding that recruiting would be difficult if there was a chance that officers could be sued for their actions.

“The state gives us rifles, firearms and other equipment,” Matthews said, adding that troopers should not be “worried about being sued and losing their homes.” If there is hesitation by officers, victims “would be injured or killed,” he said.

Waterbury Mayor Neil O’Leary, a former police chief for nearly seven years during a 30-year police career, said that “a small percentage of law enforcement officers” in Connecticut and across the nation “should not or ever have been police officers” due to their “outrageous criminal conduct.‘'

But O’Leary said only one state — Colorado — has eliminated qualified immunity, saying that officers are responsible to pay for the first $25,000 in a civil award. After talking to multiple lawyers about the issue, O’Leary said, “I seem to get a different answer and a different opinion” from each lawyer.

Matthews agreed, saying, “Everyone has a different understanding of what qualified immunity is.''

The Connecticut Police Chiefs Association, which represents 105 chiefs covering 75% of the state population, agrees that recruiting would be hurt if immunity is eliminated and that further study is needed.

“All too often, qualified immunity under federal law will protect an officer who has violated a victim’s rights by given the officer a free pass,” the trial lawyers said in written testimony.

Prompted by the death of George Floyd, more than 150 officials and activists signed up for Friday’s hearing that lasted more than seven hours on detailed police accountability legislation that bans chokeholds, requires body cameras and seeks to change the culture of policing across the state.

The 65-page draft bill represents the response of both Democratic and Republican legislators who are reacting to the national outcry and protests following the death of Floyd in Minneapolis that was caught on videotape with an officer continually pressing down on Floyd’s neck until he died. Lawmakers are expected to vote on the bill in a special legislative session later this month.

Sen. Daniel Champagne, a former police sergeant who now also serves as mayor of Vernon, cited a recent state police contract — approved by legislators — that blocks the public release of complaints against state troopers if they are determined to be unfounded. The police accountability bill would make those complaints public.

Concerning the calls for more body and dashboard cameras, Champagne questioned whether a camera is needed in the cars of chiefs, detectives and undercover officers.

He also questioned the rising costs for towns to implement the proposed reforms, saying, “This is just another form of defunding police.”

Rep. Thomas O’Dea, a New Canaan Republican, said legislators need to strike the proper balance in weeding out the rogue officers and remembering that the majority of officers perform their duties well.

“We want to make sure that we don’t throw out the baby with the bath water,” O’Dea said.

The bill, crafted by Sen. Gary Winfield of New Haven and others on a bipartisan basis, seeks increased police oversight, accountability and transparency in an effort to reduce police brutality and use of force. Reps. Robyn Porter and Toni Walker, who both live in New Haven, said they had been pulled over by police in traffic stops and questioned. Porter said that minority residents are often treated differently by police in different communities.

The legislature’s judiciary committee held the hearing Friday via Zoom video conference as lawmakers remained in their homes instead of gathering at the state Capitol complex. Lawmakers blocked off 12 hours for the hearing, but many speakers throughout the day were limited to three minutes — unless committee members had questions.

The Rev. James Manship, a Roman Catholic priest who served at a church in New Haven, said he strongly opposed “the racist policing practices” of the East Haven police that led to a wide-ranging federal investigation that eventually prompted reforms in the department and led to the arrest in 2012 of four police officers. The officers were acting “like bullies with badges,” an FBI supervisor said at the time.

“In short, police cannot investigate police,” Manship said, adding that independence of investigations is paramount.

Stonington Police Chief Darren Stewart, who serves as the new president of the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association, said the chiefs are concerned about the portion of the bill that prevents officers from searching the cars and frisking the occupants of cars stopped solely for motor vehicle violations. The chiefs say that searches should be permitted if there is “written or video proof that the individual providing consent was informed of their rights” and that they could have rejected the search.

Christopher Keating can be reached at ckeating@courant.com.