JJC Trustees Clash Over New Policy Controlling Information Requests

Joliet Junior College Board Meeting | Dec. 10, 2025

Article Summary: The Joliet Junior College Board of Trustees passed a new policy requiring trustee inquiries to be routed through the board chair, sparking a contentious debate. Minority trustees argued the move restricts their oversight capabilities and violates accreditation standards, while the administration defended the policy as a necessary measure to streamline communication and prevent staff burnout.

Board Policy Key Points:

• New Protocol: Policy 01.36.00 requires trustees to submit requests for information to the Board Chair and Vice Chair, who then coordinate a response with the President.

• Dissent: Trustees Maureen Broderick and Michelle Lee opposed the policy, arguing it violates the Illinois Public Community College Act and Higher Learning Commission (HLC) standards.

• Abuse of Process Alleged: The Board Attorney stated the policy was designed to address “an abuse of process by a trustee” who was reportedly bombarding staff with excessive questions.

• Accreditation Defense: President Dr. Clyne Namuo, an HLC peer reviewer, stated unequivocally that the policy aligns with all accreditation criteria.

The Joliet Junior College (JJC) Board of Trustees meeting on Wednesday, December 10, 2025, turned confrontational during the first reading of a new policy regarding how board members request information.

The board reviewed Policy 01.36.00, “Board Requests for Information.” Under the new language, trustees must direct questions to the Board Chair and Vice Chair, rather than contacting college administration directly. The Chair and President will then “determine and coordinate the appropriate response,” which will be shared with the full board.

Trustee Maureen Broderick vehemently opposed the change, reading a prepared statement alleging the policy targets her specifically and violates state law and Higher Learning Commission (HLC) governance standards.

“I think this is targeted towards me,” Broderick said. “A policy that prevents a trustee from contacting or questioning the president is a red flag for governance dysfunction… Board policy cannot override state law or fiduciary duties.”

Trustee Michelle Lee joined Broderick in opposition, questioning why the Chair and President effectively have gatekeeping authority over what information trustees receive.

Board Attorney Bryan Kopman responded directly to Broderick’s legal assertions. “There is nothing in the policy that says you cannot contact the president,” Kopman said. “The problem was there was an abuse of process by the trustee where they were constantly contacting members of the cabinet… bombarding them with questions.”

Kopman explained the policy ensures all trustees get the same information simultaneously.

The debate escalated into a heated exchange regarding expenses for trustee spouses at events. Broderick questioned whether trustees were reimbursing the college for their spouses’ attendance, claiming FOIA requests showed no proof of payment. Other trustees, including Nancy Garcia Guillen, countered that they pay for their spouses personally, meaning no college record would exist.

“This is wrong to be paying for spouses to go to events,” Broderick alleged, suggesting attendance at events was a “kickback” for voting with the president.

“Please don’t disparage fellow trustees,” Chair Jim Budzinski interjected, calling for order.

President Dr. Clyne Namuo addressed the accreditation concerns raised by Broderick. Citing his seven years of experience as an HLC peer reviewer and member of the Institutional Actions Council, Namuo defended the policy.

“Not a single one of those [HLC criteria] is violated by this new policy,” Namuo said. “According to my expert accreditation experience, this policy from an HLC standpoint aligns.”