Last week, a former Newtown police officer filed a lawsuit against the Newtown Police Department (NPD), alleging the Department’s Police Chief, David Kullgren, of discrimination and retaliation. The complaint, filed by former NPD Officer Felicia Figol, accused Kullgren and other supervisors of discriminating against her based on her sex and age.
“Kullgren and other supervisors subjected Plaintiff to heightened scrutiny, unequal enforcement of departmental policies, adverse actions affecting her duties and specialty assignment, denial of equal opportunities, and promotion-related barriers,” reads the complaint. “Plaintiff opposed unfair treatment and complained about conduct she reasonably believed to be discriminatory and retaliatory. Following Plaintiff’s protected conduct and complaints, Defendants intensified their scrutiny of Plaintiff and took materially adverse actions against her.”
Figol, having previously served as a state trooper in Arizona, began working for NPD in 2004, before ultimately resigning on May 28, 2025. Kullgren was first made Chief in January 2022, a position he still holds today. Throughout the complaint, Figol accused Kullgren and the Town of singling her out for punishment, erecting barriers to promotion and overtime, and attacking the department’s canine program as a whole to punish her individually.
“After Kullgren became Chief, Plaintiff’s work environment changed significantly,” reads the complaint. “With Kullgren as Chief, Plaintiff was subjected to a pattern of disparate treatment, retaliation, professional marginalization, and denial of opportunities not imposed in the same manner on similarly situated male officers.”
Per the complaint, Figol and “another female Newtown officer” tried to organize a Newtown “Movie with a Cop” night, a community event in which officers host a movie night for the general public to attend, in the spring and summer of 2024. Figol emailed her proposal for the event to the Town’s Community Center Director, Matthew Ariniello, on June 6, 2024, and then sent an operational plan for the event to three NPD officers on June 16. Around the same time, Figol and the “female Newtown officer” attended a Board of Police Commissioners meeting, where she claims Commissioner Phil Cruz engaged them in conversation regarding the proposal.
“Chief Kullgren thereafter personally initiated and conducted an investigation into Plaintiff’s conduct relating to this proposed event, including her communication with Commissioner Cruz and the Community Center Director,” reads the complaint.
On June 18, Kullgren and Deputy Chief Bryan Bishop called Figol into a “closed-door meeting,” with Lieutenant Liam Seabrook present. She was issued “written counseling and training for allegedly violating the chain of command” by speaking with Cruz and Ariniello without going through the chain of command. The police union grieved the orders for counseling and training, both of which were ultimately revoked after a hearing with the First Selectman.
“Notwithstanding that outcome, the manner in which the issue was handled subjected Plaintiff to humiliation, scrutiny, and treatment more severe and more formal than what was ordinarily used for male officers in comparable circumstances,” reads the complaint. “Plaintiff alleges that female officers, including the Plaintiff, were subjected to harsher or more formalized discipline and counseling than male officers who engaged in comparable conduct.”
Figol, who was a canine officer, said that Kullgren “routinely failed” to call her to respond to situations that necessitated a dog on scene, and would even call neighboring departments for canine support instead. Figol also accused Kullgreen of deciding to deny her police dog, Aris, preventative surgery for “a known life-threatening medical risk in German Shepherds” per the suggestion of a “master dog trainer,” instead of a veterinarian.
“Aris later required emergency surgery,” reads the complaint. “When the Plaintiff advocated for herself, other female officers, canine Aris, or the canine program, Chief Kullgren and the Town subjected her to increasingly hostile and retaliatory treatment.”
In January 2025, a veterinarian recommended that Aris undergo hip surgery. Per the complaint, Figol was told by the veterinarian that Aris could return to work after recovering from the surgery. Figol was then called into another meeting with Kullgren and Bishop, this time with Lieutenant Scott Smith, and was told that they intended to retire Aris after his surgery on June 30, 2025.
“Plaintiff objected because, pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement, the retirement of Aris was to be determined by the veterinarian, and not unilaterally by management,” reads the complaint. “Plaintiff further alleges that shortly after she supported another female officer by attending a Police Commission meeting where discipline of that officer was being considered, management’s efforts to retire Aris and undermine Plaintiff’s K-9 assignment intensified.”
After Figol objected to Aris’s retirement, Kullgren allegedly recommended eliminating the department’s canine program outright. Per the complaint, an email sent by the First Selectman on January 21, 2025, “expressly identified” the department’s “ongoing third-party investigation regarding possible bias against female officers” as a reason to “reconsider retirement of Aris in that budget cycle.” Per the complaint, Figol argued that Newtown’s treatment of her and the canine program was “not based on legitimate operational concerns alone, but was part of a broader pattern of hostility, retaliation, and differential treatment,” and that other male canine officers were not subjected to the same.
The alleged attacks on Figol’s role as a canine handler also had financial implications. The complaint explains that as a canine handler, Figol was supposed to be on-call, meaning whenever a canine was needed, she could be called in and receive overtime. But because NPD allegedly called on other departments first, she was deprived of “overtime and work opportunities.”
“Upon information and belief, similarly situated male canine officers were afforded greater access to canine-related callouts, overtime opportunities, and specialty-assignment work, and were not bypassed in favor of outside agencies or neighboring departments in the same manner,” reads the complaint.
Figol’s complaint notes that while the third-party investigation determined there to be “insufficient” evidence to sustain formal findings of wrongdoing, it “substantiated the existence of underlying events,” and “identified evidence supporting Plaintiff’s contention that she was subjected to disparate and retaliatory treatment.”
Kullgren also allegedly prevented her from pursuing opportunities for advancement by removing her designation as a field training officer in the PD roster, denying her the ability to review answers after failing her sergeant’s exam, and telling her that she could not be both a sergeant and a canine officer. Furthermore, Figol accused Kullgren of impeding her ability to attend trainings by allegedly refusing to let her expense meals while traveling, telling his secretary not to assist her with travel arrangements, and “disciplining or criticizing her” using the NPD’s purchasing card for training-related travel expenses.
“Plaintiff alleges that these restrictions, statements and altered practices impeded her advancement and were used to disadvantage her promotional opportunities on the basis of her sex,” reads the complaint.
The complaint contained several other allegations that Figol believed represented disparate treatment. When a new police headquarters was built, Figol alleged that “no suitable space” for Aris was included, and that she was told to keep him in the garage. When her vehicle needed to be replaced, she was allegedly provided a “used vehicle with substantial mileage,” while other officers received newer ones. In 2022, neither Figol nor Aris was invited to demonstrate in Newtown’s National Night Out, a police-community event, and discovered that the National Guard’s canine unit was invited in her stead. The alleged treatment ultimately led to Figol’s resignation, per the complaint.
“Plaintiff’s resignation was the foreseeable and direct result of Defendants’ discriminatory and retaliatory conduct and therefore constituted a constructive discharge,” reads the complaint.
Per the complaint, Figol seeks back pay, lost employment benefits, compensatory damages and attorney’s fees. Figol did not respond to Inside Investigator’s request for comment, and Newtown First Selectman Bruce Walczak told Inside Investigator that town officials would not comment on pending litigation.
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
