Carafa’s Princeton educated, taxpayer funded attorney
submitted a second answer today. The
beginging of it reads: “Respondents admit
the allegatations of Paragraph 2, except they deny the characterization of “chronic
absenteeism” and they deny the allegation of more than three absences in 2017.”
This is what paragraph 2 of the complaint stated: “Trustee Carafa was absent for seven out of
sixteen meetings in 2016 (Exhibit 1).
Trustee Carafa missed four consecutive meetings. He went four months without attending a
meeting. He continued his chronic
absenteeism with at least three more absences in 2017.”
Carafa absences in 2016:
Carafa absenses in 2017 (There may be more):
February 7, 2017
March 7, 2017
April 24, 2017
June 26, 2017
Carafa rarely attended meetings until his vote was
needed to rush through the $7.5M scam (demolish a structurally sound
administration building).
Carafa didn’t attend either June graduation or the
National Honor Society induction but he always found time to show up and vote for the $7.5M scam.
Carafa’s attorney stated that the absences were for
good cause.
Carafa stated at many meetings that he was absent because he was “working”. When a meeting
ended, he said he missed so many meetings because he was working in Tarrytown, NY.
Now Carafa is denying this statement: “Trustee
Carafa has stated at many public meetings that he was working as a chef at the
time of the meetings.”
Is Carafa denying that he said he was “working” or is
he denying that he said he was working as a chef?
He mentioned he is a chef. After
a meeting he said he was running a “multi-million corporation in Tarrytown” (usual embellishment). I don’t know what the dispute is over.
A commissioner of education agreed with the Kearny
Board of Education when it removed a member for missing 3 consecutive
meetings. The member missed the meetings
because he was working as a police officer.
He argued that his absences were for good cause.
