You can listen to the broadcast and read about it here:
|KCRW runs story on CWC problems|
In the interview, CWC Director Held makes some wild allegations and tries to spin a story where CWC is the victim of bullying by the local neighborhood where CWC wants to co-locate, and not a victim of its own ineptness and failure to comply with state regulation.
She states that there is small, vocal minority in the neighborhood that is anti-charter and anti-co-location, and whose actions have culminated in violence, including graffiti, a staff member's car being intentional rear ended and, of course, the tossed cigarette infraction.
First off, I didn't know graffiti was considered violence, but, besides that, it is not a small, vocal minority that is solely anti-charter and/or anti-co-location, there are a large groups of Stoner parents and residents who are upset for different reasons at the conditions caused by the co-location. These groups are being represented by community leaders who have stepped up to speak for both the residents and Stoner ES community. I've previously written on the graffiti here and here, and on the tossed cigarette infraction here and a here. As for the intentional rear ending, just like the cigarette infraction, I have heard rumors that your humble blogger here was the perpetrator, who, in this case, intentional rammed a car, then backed up and rammed the car again before driving off ...so I don't know what to make of that. There was probably an accident involving the CWC community and now it's been exaggerated into a demolition derby-targeting of the CWC community. I had nothing to do with it and it definitely was not part of some grand master plan.
To claim that a small group of neighbors' organizing to fight for their neighborhood and to protect their local school culminated in violence, graffiti, ramming a car and throwing a cigarettes at a baby is just absurd.
Since we are on the topic of the absurd, Held's claim that moving the school would be a problematic since many parents walk and bike to school is just that. I can't even believe that she would try to claim something so patently untrue. The majority of the CWC community comes from outside of the service area of Stoner ES. As such, the vast majority of CWC students are driven into the area, which creates the traffic problems, and then the parents park in the neighborhood, creating parking problems, and walk their kids to school. So, yes, there is a large number of CWC who walk to school, but only after having been driven in many miles from outside of the area.
Held tries to brush off the missed deadline (which is the real reason CWC will not be co-locating at Stoner) as a mere procedural error. This was not a procedural error, it was lack of compliance with a state regulation. I've previously written about the missed deadline here and here. CWC did not comply with a state mandated regulation and now its community is suffering the consequences of this failure by the CWC administration.
This missed deadline is representative of the root issue of many of the problems we have experienced with CWC: CWC refuses to follow the rules. Whether it is creating unsafe conditions on campus by leaving their gate unlocked, open and unattended, allowing CWC parents and teachers to enter the shared students only bathroom, or creating health and privacy issues by hosing down a sick, naked student on campus; CWC has shown that it believes the rules do not apply to them. In this case, this lack of respect has cost them dearly.
The topic of the "community" dinner came up, I had previously covered that here, here and here. Only 4 people from each side attended. The silence from both sides was deafening.
Finally, Held mentioned that CWC had been given another offer this weekend, but gave no further details as to where they might be locating.
When I know more, you'll be able to read about it here. The adventures continue....