In a tone deaf move that imitates the misguided steps of the previously co-located charter at Stoner ES, ICEF is blaming the co-location concerns on a "few people" who want to "stir unrest and provide misinformation in an attempt to inflame public sentiment over the co-location."
The notice pictured, dated March 6, was still taped outside the ICEF Vista main office today. This notice presents new co-location myths that need to be debunked.
MYTH# 1. "There are a few people in the community who do not agree with this placement"
TRUTH: Over 100 Stoner and ICEF community member wrote letters, sent emails and signed petitions opposing the co-location.
The Stoner community also held a protest on March 10 to oppose the co-location in front of the ICEF Vista campus at the St. Gerard Majella church.
Just as CWC did last year, ICEF is trying to minimize the concerns of an entire community by claiming that only a "few" representatives are the ones with concerns.
MYTH #2. "We believe that keeping students within the community where they live and play is an important factor in their education."
TRUTH: This platitude sounds great, and I would love it if it was true, but it doesn't jibe with the reality of this co-location. More then half of the 170 students who will be co-located will come from outside of the neighborhood and will thus be leaving "the community where they live and play" to take resources from our neighborhood students.
MYTH #3. "unassigned rooms"
TRUTH: A few weeks ago, they were calling them "empty" rooms, now they are "unassigned" We've gone over this before, these "unassigned rooms" are our arts, music, computer lab, parents center, etc, etc, etc.... [read more here]
MYTH #4 "...if ICEF Vista does not co-locate at Stoner, another charter school will."
TRUTH: Ah, the threat of inevitability. This is my favorite myth. CWC would often use this threat too: if not us, then someone else will co-locate here....so, just get used to it.
Just a few weeks back, ICEF admin was telling their community that the co-location was a "done deal" and could not be stopped. This was later walked back by ICEF when opposition to the co-location started.
ICEF is using the threat of an inevitable co-location at Stoner as justification for their proposed occupation to both the Stoner and ICEF community. Someone will be there, so why not us?
If some charter will inevitability co-locate at Stoner, then why is no charter co-located at Stoner right now? It looks like the inevitable can be evaded.
This co-location does not need to happen. ICEF still has until May 1 to withdraw their request, or not respond to the offer and end this proposed travesty with no penalty.
LAUSD issued the Final Offer for space on April 1, 2015. It is now up to ICEF. They can choose to do what's best for the community or what is best for their business. They can choose to continue being the "school at the church" or they can be greeted with the following at their entrance if they co-locate at Stoner.