Plum Council continues officer's suspension
Plum Council voted Thursday night to continue the suspension with pay of borough police Officer Jeremy Cumberledge “pending further investigation.”
The 5-0 vote came at a special meeting called to address Cumberledge's situation. Councilmen Don Knopfel and Steve “Skip” Taylor did not attend.
The five council members who did, as well as Mayor Richard Hrivnak, left the five-minute meeting without commenting.
Borough Manager Michael Thomas declined to discuss the investigation and what agency is conducting it.
Cumberledge, a borough patrolman since 2007, did not attend the meeting and did not respond to messages seeking comment. The officer's base pay salary is about $78,800.
Thomas declined to comment when asked why the meeting was called to continue the officer's suspension with pay. That's the way the issue was described on a printed meeting agenda.
Cumberledge has been suspended with pay since Jan. 11 after what borough officials have said was an internal breach of the municipal computer system.
The computer system contained records for the borough's 67 employees.
Thomas has said the breach did not involve any resident's information, such as tax records.
He also has said once the breach was discovered, measures were taken to ensure it didn't happen again.
Plum officials turned over information with respect to the computer breach to another law enforcement agency, Thomas has said.
Police vacancies to be filled
In other action, council authorized the borough staff to prepare a list of candidates for police lieutenant, sergeant and patrolman.
The openings are a result of the retirement last month of former police Chief Frank Monaco and the promotion of former Lt. Jeffrey Armstrong to chief.
Karen Zapf is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 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.