Trustee Disputes JJC Presidential Evaluation Process; Counsel Cites Policy

Joliet Junior College | September 16, 2026

Article Summary: Trustee Maureen Broderick told the Joliet Junior College Board of Trustees on Wednesday, Sept. 16, 2026, that the president’s evaluation had been conducted by “the minority” of the board without authorization, prompting Chair Nancy Garcia Guillen and the board’s attorney to defend the process as consistent with board policy.

Presidential Evaluation Dispute Key Points:

Broderick said a majority of trustees never saw the evaluation and never authorized the committee that conducted it.

Garcia Guillen said a July 29, 2026, board retreat lacked a quorum, and that she and Trustee Alicia Morales met with President Dr. Clyne Namuo as the presidential evaluation committee on July 31.

The board’s attorney cited the committees policy, policy 01.27.00 on the presidential evaluation report, and policy 01.80.01 on the JD Ross Extraordinary Service Award.

The dispute surfaced during the vote on agenda item 1.10, approval of the agenda, which passed on a voice vote with at least one audible no.

JOLIET — A dispute over how Joliet Junior College evaluated its president consumed several minutes of the Board of Trustees’ Sept. 16, 2026, meeting, with Trustee Maureen Broderick arguing the process bypassed most of the board and Chair Nancy Garcia Guillen and the board’s attorney responding that policy was followed.

The exchange began on agenda item 1.10, approval of the agenda, when Broderick said reports from two ad hoc committees she had requested last month were missing.

“Per policy they should be on one of our regular board meetings so that we can discuss it, because you have one for candidates and one for president’s evaluation,” Broderick said. “Those are new committees. Even though you assigned it and did it, we’re supposed to come before the board to talk about it so we know what is going on with those committees.”

Garcia Guillen said an update on the candidates committee had been given verbally at the board’s Aug. 3 special meeting, and that a written report from the presidential evaluation committee had been placed in front of trustees for the Sept. 16 meeting.

Broderick asked to respond. Garcia Guillen asked counsel whether a rebuttal was permitted; the attorney said it was.

“My concern on that one — you and Trustee Morales gave it. It was a minority that opened the report,” Broderick said. “The majority has not seen that report. The majority did not come together, and I gave you an email that said what the steps were supposed to be. Those steps were not followed.”

She continued: “You all of a sudden just went to a president’s evaluation ad hoc committee, and all of it is supposed to be open in front of a quorum of the board in closed session. That didn’t happen. I didn’t see the evaluation. I didn’t give you permission as a trustee. The majority didn’t give you permission as the majority to go in and discuss it, because we didn’t see anything of that report. So it was done totally wrong. Absolutely wrong.”

The Chair’s Account

Garcia Guillen responded by laying out dates. A board retreat had been scheduled for July 29, she said, and included both the trustees’ self-evaluation and the presidential evaluation.

“For that particular meeting, we did not have a quorum. Therefore, we were not able to actually do the process that we knew that we were going to do several months in advance,” she said.

Garcia Guillen said board policy permits the chair to create committees, and asked counsel to explain.

“There’s a policy on committees. Committees serve at the whim of the chair. The chair can appoint them, set them up as needed, and as required to accomplish whatever the board or the chair desires,” the attorney said. “So that was what was followed with the ad hoc committee.”

On the evaluation itself, the attorney said: “With the presidential evaluation committee, a report’s been provided to the board as required under policy 01.27.00.”

He also addressed Broderick’s separate complaint that the JD Ross Extraordinary Service Award recipients had not come before the board for a vote. “Policy 01.80.01 provides that a selection committee will choose the award recipients and present them to the board,” he said. “There’s nothing about the board approving them.”

Broderick said the award had historically been voted on by the board “except for the last two years, which when you changed policy, but policy didn’t say not to vote.”

Garcia Guillen closed the item: “Therefore, permission was not needed to have the presidential evaluation committee. Therefore, you all have the written report in front of you all to review.”

The agenda was then approved on a voice vote. At least one trustee voted no.

The Chair’s Report

Garcia Guillen returned to the subject in her chair’s report under item 5.3, confirming that she and Morales met with Namuo on July 31, 2026, as the presidential evaluation committee, and that a written report based on that meeting was provided for the September meeting.

“Dr. Namuo, we want to thank you for your leadership, for your ability to be an innovative leader and to challenge us to do more,” she said.

She also responded to Broderick’s complaint, raised during trustee updates, that the chair had not communicated with her.

“Something that you failed to mention is that you mentioned the importance of communication and reaching out and meeting,” Garcia Guillen said. “Our executive assistant Karen has reached out to you since I became chair in order to actually schedule a meeting. So you have been unable or unwilling to meet, but the invitation has been extended. So just putting it out there for record.”

She added: “Not time for rebuttal. Just putting it on the record.”

Broderick’s trustee update had included a list of governance changes she wants the board to consider, among them moving to committees of the whole, distributing emails to all trustees rather than “some selective ones,” revising policies that reference a “good standing trustee,” posting notice of committee meetings, and removing a report and a former chairman’s name from the college’s website.

“I think there should be things done to remove the negativity that’s out there,” she said.