Parents and alumni urge Dodge City board to reconsider coach Zach Shipley’s removal

Dozens of parents and alumni used the public-comment period at the Dodge City Board of Education meeting to press the board for answers about the removal of longtime baseball coach Zach Shipley and to highlight his work with a youth baseball pipeline.

"More than 150 young athletes who are currently involved in this youth program that he has helped create believe in that," one resident said, urging the board to measure success by participation and culture as well as wins and losses. Parent and community member Britney Roar told the board she had "a front row seat to all things Dodge City baseball" and said residents are seeking clarity about a personnel decision that many find hard to reconcile with their experience.

Alumnus Brady Hut, who said Shipley recruited him into coaching youth baseball, described Shipley as a builder of programs and pipelines and said whoever leads Dodge City baseball next will inherit a community-built program. "If there's anybody deserving to be the head baseball coach for Dodge City High School, it's Zach Shipley," Hut said.

Mike Acres, who identified himself during public comment, asked whether the action followed a parent letter alleging concerns over playing time and urged transparency from the board. "Did this happen because a parent sent a letter complaining about their kids playing time?" he asked, adding that rumors and innuendo would persist without clear communication from the district.

Board leaders thanked speakers for coming and reiterated that personnel matters cannot be discussed in open session because of confidentiality; they said the comments would be taken under consideration but did not offer additional details about next steps.

The board did not take any public action on the personnel matter at the meeting; it moved on to its posted agenda items. The chair reminded the community that specific personnel deliberations are handled under executive-session rules.

What happens next: Board members said the comments were noted and would be considered; the district indicated it could not discuss personnel matters in open session because of confidentiality protections.