ICEF's plan is to "steal from Peter to give to Paul"

Protesters asking ICEF to not covet their classrooms

Wow, I was just alerted to the ICEF Vista School Site Counsel's February 2015 meeting minutes where ICEF makes it very clear that their intent is to take away resources from Stoner ES to open up space on the ICEF Vista St. Gerard campus to provide those same resources to their own students.

In section e. Expansion Discussion v. We want parents to know all the benefits of the move 2. the minutes state "We get to use some of the facilities at Stoner and will now have open space at our school."  Subsection a goes on to state "Our open space can be used for:  Art room, computer lab, resource room, room for one more section of 6th graders."

Wow, wow, WOW! ICEF wants to take away resources from Stoner which would include the art room, computer lab, music room and other resource rooms so that they can create empty space on their campus to provide almost the exact same resources they are taking away from the Stoner ES students to their own students.
     This is unconscionable. ICEF, which many in the neighborhood refer to as "the school at the church", is "stealing from Peter to give to Paul." They want to take resources away from students at Stoner ES to give those same resources to ICEF students on the St. Gerard campus.

   One other thing I should point out is section e. viii. states "Stoner overall may not be very happy about this move" and in subsection 3 states "We need to clear up misconceptions that Stoner families may have."

     First off, Stoner is not just unhappy, the Stoner community is extremely mad and is fighting back against this co-location. 'Not be very happy' is an understatement. The Stoner community has already held a protest in front of the ICEF Vista campus at the church, and the co-location hasn't even happened yet.

ICEF Vista: "Stealing from Peter to give to Paul"
ICEF Vista SSC Feb 2015 minutes show that ICEF plans to take
resources from Stoner, to provide those same resources to  ICEF

    Secondly, ICEF doesn't need to clear up misconceptions about a co-location, Stoner lived through a co-location last year and knows what it will be like. Stoner parents began asking for a protest when news of the co-location was announced.
     A co-location creates problems and competition for resources. A co-location creates segregation on campus and ICEF even acknowledges this in in the SSC minutes in section e. ii. stating "..., there will be a definite divide between Vista and Stoner students." In other words, there will be a divided campus with separate and unequal conditions for the different school's students.
      If you don't believe me, you can see the minutes on ICEF website at: http://icefivms.sharpschool.net/UserFiles/Servers/Server_31331/File/SchoolSiteCouncilMeeting-212.docx
    There is also a jpg of the minutes included with this post.

     I am going to repeat what I told the ICEF Board at their February meeting: "ICEF please don't steal from Peter to give to Paul."
   

LA School Report: Deadline questions

LA School Report has another story in the Stoner/ICEF co-location drama.
    Apparently, ICEF submitted their application on Nov 2, 2014, and the deadline set by state regulation was Nov 1.
    However, due to a "technical error," on Nov 1 and noon, LAUSD extended the deadline to Nov 4.
     Now Stoner parents are asking, does LAUSD have the authority to ignore state regulations and extend the deadline? Is the ICEF request valid?

Read the article here:
http://laschoolreport.com/stoner-parents-challenging-lausd-for-extending-co-location-deadline/#more-34080

ICEF gets $100K to NOT co-locate in Inglewood

Stoner parents speak at ICEF board meeting to oppose co-location

A charter school co-location brings many problems. So much so, some school districts are willing to pay to not have to deal with a co-location.

    At the February 2015 ICEF Monthly board meeting, the board discussed a proposed co-location at an Inglewood Unified School District site. Per the board, "the site offered was not appropriate." So, Inglewood and ICEF entered into negotiations. Ultimately, Inglewood offered ICEF $100,000 to buy its co-location rights for the next two years. ICEF accepted the offer. Basically, Inglewood is paying ICEF $100K to not co-locate.
     This is very troubling. What type of business is given money to do nothing?  What about the ICEF students who signed up that were used as justification for the co-location request? What about the Inglewood students whose school district will have $100K less to spend on them?

Stoner to take petitions to ICEF Board meeting

Over the past few weeks, the booster club, Friends of Stoner, has been collecting signatures from the Stoner community, local community and ICEF community to oppose the co-location of ICEF Vista on the Stoner ES campus for 2015/16.
    At the Thursday, March 19 ICEF Board Meeting, Friends of Stoner will be presenting the petitions and again expressing opposition against the proposed co-location to the ICEF Board.
     FOS has collected over 100 letters and signatures on petitions asking ICEF to withdraw its co-location request.
     If the co-location hasn't even started and ICEF has already been faced with a protest and petitions, do they think things will get better if the co-location happens?

Stoner supporters take to ICEF Facebook

ICEF 1 star reviews asking for no co-location

Over the weekend, supporters of Stoner Avenue Elementary School took to the review section of the ICEF Facebook page to express their opposition to the co-location at Stoner.
    Supporters bombarded the school with 1 star reviews and brought the school's rating down from 5 star last week to 3 stars today.  The reviews came from all over the place including the Stoner community, local community and ICEF community.  All the reviews were asking ICEF to "do the right thing" and not co-location at Stoner.
   The opposition to the co-location is growing, and it hasn't even started yet. ICEF is being told online and out in the real world that this co-location is a bad idea and they should withdraw their request. Are they listening?

PROTEST: ICEF Vista co-location at Stoner

Hoy, there fellow adventurers! You've probably wondering where I've been. Judging from the number of hits to the blog, people have been waiting for info on the protest, but I've been busy. I'm not a full time writer and sometimes life gets in the way, but I've got time now. So, here we go....

Tuesday, March 10, 2015 the Stoner Elementary School community held a protest against the proposed "ICEF Vista Elementary School co-location at Stoner Avenue" in front of the ICEF Vista Elementary/ICEF Vista Middle School location on the St. Gerard's campus.
   Over 30 parents plus Stoner students participated in the protest. A half a dozen ICEF parents joined the protest, by standing on the church grounds asking for help to make ICEF a better school.

   ICEF had four security guards stationed around campus and there were 3 cops cars on Inglewood. So, the Stoner protesters felt safe.
   There was even a military fly over. Stoner had air support!
   One odd-ball ICEF parent openly, immaturely, and sophomoricly mocked the Stoner protesters for their willingness to defy state law and ask for a better future for their children. The display was comical and sadly amusing.
    ICEF administration was present for the protest but stayed far away from the protesters behind a red barricade near the school classrooms.
   A reporter for the Argonaut showed up to the protest and interviewed parents for an article that is supposed to come out this week. We'll let you know when this is published.

   Finally, the Stoner community plans to continue the opposition to the co-location with more protests and stronger actions. This week, Friends of Stoner will be presenting the ICEF Board with over 100 letters and petitions signatures from the Stoner and ICEF community stating their opposition to the co-location.

ICEF co-location myths

In talking to ICEF and its community regarding the co-location, we have encounter many myths about the co-location and would like clear some of them up.

Myth #1: The co-location is a “done deal” and cannot be stopped.
FALSE: The co-location process requires many steps and has various deadlines. ICEF can still withdraw its request at this time. At this point ICEF has only accepted the preliminary offer. The co-location contract is not complete until ICEF agrees to the FINAL offer which has not yet been made but will be issued on or before April 1, 2015. There still is time for ICEF to withdraw its co-location request.

Myth #2: ICEF did not choose Stoner, LAUSD offered it.
FALSE: On PROPOSITION 39 ONLINE FACILITIES REQUEST FORM submitted by ICEF, ICEF specifically selected Stoner ES as the site it would like to co-location. See picture.

Myth #3: Stoner offered and is freely giving ICEF empty classroom space on campus.
FALSE: ICEF initiated a space request under the Prop 39 charter school co-location process. Stoner and LAUSD must follow the law and offer any rooms for co-location that don’t have a teacher and a roster of 20 students, even if these rooms are being used for other resources.

Myth #4: A co-location would have no impact on Stoner students.
FALSE: If ICEF co-locates, Stoner students would be directly impacted. Stoner would lose space for art, music and dance among other resources. Taking any of these rooms or programs would be devastating to the Stoner scholars and would create discontent among the students.

    These are the biggest myths about the proposed co-location at Stoner. I look forward to dispelling these and more at today's anti-coloocation protest rally.

ICEF plots to counter protests

A community member alerted me that the icef principal and some administration were out behind the church plotting something.

   I had a minute so I figured I would go by and see what was going on.

   I walked up to the group and said "Taking about the protest, are we? 

   Yes, they were strategizing about the protest, but they were also waiting for the cops.

    ICEF administration threatened having the protesters arrested. I laughed, it's a public sidewalk. 

     ICEF admin said there are five more charters waiting to co-locate. I told them we didn't care if there were 50 charters waiting, we would oppose them all. 

     I let them know this was only the first protest and that if they accept the co-location there would be protests starting the first day of school. 

Stoner to protest ICEF co-location

Tomorrow the Stoner ES community will be holding a protest rally in front of ICEF Vista to oppose the co-location of ICEF at Stoner ES.

BOMBSHELL!!! CWC DOCS RELEASED - Follow up #4 to "Naked CWC student hosed down on campus"

For whatever reason, the legal team to Citizens of the World Charter Mar Vista has finally decided to release the CWC documents related to the hosing of the naked charter school student on the Stoner ES campus and all I can say is...BOMBSHELL!!!!!
    The heavily redacted 78 pages released included personal emails and documents watermarked confidential, but some of the stuff that slipped through in these email is just too juicy. It's better than I could have expected (but also sadder than I could have imagined.)
   I am going to give a few examples, but you'll have to read the best stuff in the book.

*In total, there were 7 different versions of the incident from CWC.

*Depending on which you believe:
   -the executive director: was on campus OR was not aware of the incident until 12 school days later
   -the principal: was off campus OR in a closed door meeting and could not be disturbed
   -the child: was given a bag with a hole for his head OR the bag had holes for his legs.
   -there were 3 people OR 1 person present for the child's hosing

*The one thing all the CWC stories have in common, is the Stoner parent who witnessed the hosing is never mentioned. How would the Stoner community have ever known about this incident if there wasn't a witness?

   Well, I'd like to get back to finishing writing this up for the book, but it's going to have to wait while I attend to matters of the latest co-location attempt at Stoner ES.

 

LA School report: co-location fight on horizon

LA School Report reports: there is a co-location fight is on the horizon...and you'll never guess where. Why here, in Del Rey, at Stoner Avenue Elementary School, of course.

Read the report here: http://laschoolreport.com/another-co-location-fight-on-the-horizon-and-guess-where-stoner-es/

Stoner community to oppose ICEF co-location

When the news came out on February 4, that ICEF Vista planned to co-location at Stoner ES, the response from the community was swift and strong. Stoner parents kept asking me "When are we going to protest?" and I would say that were weren't going to protest unless we had to. First, we needed to talk to LAUSD and ICEF to have all the information.
   A week after the announcement, LAUSD held meetings about the co-location. When parents heard that our set aside rooms for special programs would have to be given up to make space for ICEF, the anger and outrage of the Stoner parents grew, and community leaders decided they needed to act now.

Petition signing at Stoner Avenue Elementary

    The following week, Stoner community representatives attended the ICEF monthly board meeting to present their concerns and express the opposition to the proposed co-location.  The pleas to the board fell on deaf ears, and the board said they would continue the co-location process.

   Last week, members of the booster club Friend of Stoner Elementary School were in front of Stoner ES handing out information and collecting signatures to oppose the proposed co-location.

   This week, Stoner parents were in front of ICEF Vista passing out information and collecting signatures from the ICEF community to oppose the co-location. The Friends of Stoner were surprised to learn that there are many in the ICEF community who are opposed to the co-location and don't want their school split. Many ICEF parents have expressed concern that their administration did not consult them, and are talking about pulling their kids out of ICEF if the co-location happens.

Friends of Stoner talk to ICEF parents, principal about co-location

    However, ICEF is continuing down the co-location road that will create conflict and division in the neighborhood. Last night, ICEF held an information session for its parents and continued with the claim that the co-location was a "done deal" and there was nothing they could do to stop it. ICEF representatives were also present at last night's Del Rey Neighborhood council meeting to let the community know that they are planning on accepting the co-location regardless of what the local community, Stoner community and ICEF community want.
    The Stoner community will continue collecting signatures on a petition opposing the co-location to present at next ICEF board meeting on March 19.

    Unfortunately, ICEF is moving on undeterred, and so it looks like we might be having protests in the neighborhood.

100th blog post!

Woo-hoo! This is the 100th published blog post for Adventures in Charter School Co-location.
   When I started this blog a year ago, I never really figured this would help end the charter co-location. I thought I might write two or three posts and abandon it, but somehow here we are a year and a 100 postings later.
    One of the more popular stories for most of the year was a one line post with a picture titled: It's Official #3: Carpetbaggers. However, by the end of the year the story CWC Director to resign tonight eventually took the top spot. There were other popular stories including: Stoner Elementary community to protest CWC co-location, IT'S OFFICIAL - No co-location at Stoner ES for 2014/15, and Naked CWC student hosed down on campus. I also had some favorites I would like to mention the CWC karma tickets, segregated rock conert and the snark edition #2.

  While it's been fun documenting the adventures, I was hoping this blog would be done already, but as Stoner Elementary once again stares down the barrel of a co-location, the community is fighting back and so, I'll be writing about it.