The Martin Chronicles has confirmed that Villa Hills malfeasant Mayor Mike Martin has suspended Detective Joe Schutzman without pay pending a hearing when Martin will be pressing for Schutzman's termination. According to other news sources, Martin is accusing Schutzman of "gross misconduct" and "political activism". That should be one amazing hearing.
Worse yet, Martin's actions have left the already-crime-challenged streets of Villa Hills protected by only 4 police officers. How long will it be before we hear Martin cloyingly claim that he has no choice but to bring in another police agency to protect his residents?
As we have warned you, Martin is hell-bent on getting his revenge against the police agency he blames for his 2007 FORGERY ARREST. We suspect that the 600 signs and the large number of vocal supporters of the Villa Hills police caught Martin a bit off guard. Impatient, we believe he has decided to take a more direct route to force outsourcing.
But what were Schutzman's acts of "gross misconduct" and "political activism"?Are they so serious that they warrant leap-frogging over the normal practice of progressive discipline? We guess we'll find out.
This is not the first time the malevolent Martin has taken this path in an attempt to terminate a City employee. Martin took the same approach with one of his poor clerks. Martin suspended her. Martin defamed her in the media. Martin had her appear before the civil service board to be terminated. The board chose to uphold her suspension but not terminate her.
Now Martin is taking Schutzman down this same, exact path. This leads us to a question. Why does Martin apply his radical brand of discipline in such an inconsistent way?
Let us explain. We learned that Martin reprimanded his interim city clerk during his October 2012 removal hearing. Martin's written reprimand charged the interim city clerk with serious violations of federal and state laws and city ordinances. Martin's reprimand also said he had repeatedly advised this clerk about her violations to no avail.
So what happened to the clerk? Not one damned thing. No suspension. No hearing. No loss of pay. In fact, when an open records request was placed for the clerk's written reprimand, the requester was advised that the City did not have it in their possession. Seriously? That is damned odd, huh?
So let's connect the dots. Why do we think that Martin pushed for termination for the first poor clerk and is now pushing for Schutzman's termination? That's easy. Both of them testified against Martin during last October's removal hearing. It's pure payback. Vicious vendetta. The Martin way.
What about his interim city clerk? Why have her serious infractions been swept under the rug. Just watch her testimony during last year's removal hearing. It's pretty obvious that Martin's follow-up actions (the disappearance of her written reprimand, for instance) are his way of telling the interim clerk, "Thank you, my good and faithful servant".
Things are about to get a whole lot worse.
