Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Coach Investigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, students split at L'Anse Creuse meeting over fate of high‑school football coach
Summary
Dozens of parents, students and community members addressed the L'Anse Creuse board Dec. 15 with sharply divided testimony about an ongoing personnel review of high‑school football coach Brent Widows; some alleged inappropriate conduct and misuse of private information, while others urged the board to preserve stability for student athletes.
Dozens of parents, students and community members spoke at the L'Anse Creuse Public Schools board meeting Dec. 15 about an ongoing personnel review involving high‑school football coach Brent Widows.
Multiple speakers urged the board to retain the coach, saying he has rebuilt culture and mentored students. Parent Felicia Como told trustees she had seen “measurable improvements including stronger accountability, leadership development, academic oversight, and clear progress on the field,” and asked the board to “stand for stability, fairness, and student‑focused decision making.” Student athletes also testified that Widows has helped them “grow up and be a man,” urged continuity and warned repeated turnover damages the program.
Other speakers offered opposing accounts. A parent identified in the transcript as Speaker 31 described a series of interactions she says were inappropriate and emotionally harmful, including an exchange in which her son was told by the coach that playing football was linked to self‑harm; she said the incident left the student “in shock and confused” and characterized the comments as “dangerous.” Another commenter (Speaker 23) said multiple reports of policy violations, alleged ignoring of medical advice and private information shared in confidence had been raised with athletic administrators prior to coming to the board.
Board members did not take formal personnel action in open session. Several public commenters said they had pursued confidential reports with the athletic director, principal and central administration before speaking to the board. The district has said it is investigating personnel matters; the board confined direct discussion of employee details to the session it later held in closed session under state law.
The board’s public record from the meeting shows no formal vote related to the coach during open session. Trustees acknowledged the volume of public comment and indicated the district follows established protocols for personnel matters and for escalation to closed session when necessary. Several speakers asked the board to consider both student safety and program stability as it evaluates next steps.
The board is expected to follow its usual personnel and investigatory procedures; no final, open‑session personnel decision was recorded at this meeting.
