Portland Public Schools’ Sweetheart Deal Problem

As a former school superintendent, I’ve seen plenty of consulting contracts, vendor relationships, and outside partnerships. Public education depends on trust, and on fiduciary duty: the legal and moral obligation of officials to place the public interest above their own. Trust that decisions are being made in the best interest of students, families, and taxpayers, not to reward insiders.

That is why the latest revelations involving Portland Public Schools should concern everyone.

In March, we learned that the Superintendent Kimberlee Armstrong’s daughter received a job with Procedeo, the Texas firm that the superintendent strongly advocated to receive a $61 million school construction oversight contract, bypassing local firms with comparable expertise. That alone raised legitimate questions about favoritism, judgment, and professional boundaries.

Taxpayers funding Portland schools have every right to demand answers: why was an out-of-state firm awarded a $61 million contract over qualified local professionals? And why did that same firm then hire the superintendent’s daughter?

Now comes another troubling report: two former PPS school board members have since been hired by Procedeo as “consultants” for a combined $6,000 per month, despite no clearly defined job responsibilities? That is not a coincidence. That is a pattern.

At a time when PPS is facing serious budget pressures, families are absorbing cuts, and staff are doing more with less, Procedeo somehow found room in the budget for vague consulting arrangements with politically connected former board members.

There is always money available for insiders. Somehow.

One of those former board members is Herman Greene, who is currently running for a seat on the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners.

Greene acknowledged the obvious concern, saying he was aware that he “might face skepticism about the optics of the arrangement.”

He’s right.

Voters should be skeptical. Not just about optics, but about whether public officials are honoring their duty. This is about accountability, and about whether those who once held the public trust, and now seek to hold it again, are living up to it.

When former elected officials move directly into paid consultant roles with companies that do business with the institutions they once governed, the public has every right to ask hard questions. What exactly are they being paid to do? Why are these services worth thousands of dollars a month? Were these positions openly competed, or were they simply offered because of personal relationships and political access?

That does not look like public service. It looks like a self-dealing network where access to public institutions is converted into private benefit, and those without connections simply pay the bill.

In public education, perception matters because trust matters.

This pattern undermines that trust.

Leadership in public education is not just about avoiding wrongdoing. It is about upholding the foundational obligation that public office exists for public benefit, not private gain.

As a former superintendent, I cannot help but ask: how do I get a deal like that?

But the better- and serious- question is this: why should the public tolerate sweetheart deals for PPS insiders and family members?

Portland families deserve transparency, ethical leadership, and a school system where decisions are made in the interest of students, not for the benefit of insiders and their families.

Students should come first. Not contracts. Not consultants. Not connected insiders.

This deserves scrutiny. Not excuses.