Plum police chief returns from sick leave
Plum police chief Frank Monaco is on the mend and back at work after taking a medical leave. Sidney L.
Photo by Davis | Trib Total Media
Plum police Chief Frank Monaco has returned to work.
Monaco, who had been on sick leave since early December, said he was hospitalized due to complications from surgery.
“I got my emails from home and was doing some things from home,” Monaco, chief for nearly six years, said Monday, his first day back on the job.
The chief's doctor last Friday released him to return to work, he said.
In Monaco's absence, Lt. Jeffrey Armstrong, second-in-command, directed the daily operation of the 25-man department.
“He (Armstrong) ran the show,” Monaco said. “He did a yeoman's job. He knows how to do everything, and I am confident in his abilities. I'm blessed to have him as my second-in-command.”
Monaco pointed out that Armstrong handled the duties of acting chief for nearly a year when former Chief Robert Payne in 2006 left the post for a job in the private sector. Payne became police chief in Edgewood in 2008.
Mayor Richard Hrivnak said he is pleased at Monaco's return as well as Armstrong's performance over the past month and a half.
“I am extremely happy the chief is feeling better and is back to work,” Hrivnak said.
“Jeff Armstrong did a phenomenal job in the chief's absence. We are blessed to have him.”
Karen Zapf is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8753, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.