Portland Public Schools is preparing for a pivotal vote this Tuesday that could determine who oversees more than $1 billion in high school modernization work—but escalating accusations and public pushback are already clouding the process.
.jpg)
The district is considering a five-year, $61 million agreement with Texas-based Procedeo, a construction management firm superintendent Kimberlee Armstrong describes as the strongest option to guide the district’s remaining major capital projects. In her memo to board members, Armstrong wrote that the partnership with Procedeo “strengthens our capacity, stabilizes project leadership and supports a more predictable and transparent delivery of voter-approved improvements.”
However, the selection process is now under scrutiny after Turner & Townsend Heery — the second-place bidder — issued a formal protest. In a detailed letter, President Robert Chomiak argued the district’s evaluation was “a biased procurement lacking in good faith and inconsistent with Oregon law.”
Chomiak emphasized that filing such protests is exceptionally rare for the firm, adding, “While many of our competitors make protesting unfavorable awards a way of doing business, we do not. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first school procurement that we have felt the need to protest during my 40 years with the firm.”
District officials rejected the complaint. Senior director of purchasing and contracting Paul Williams stated the district “found no basis for the protest,” defending the evaluation process and its scoring methods.
Turner & Townsend Heery may still escalate the matter under Oregon public contracting rules, potentially asking a judge to freeze the contract until concerns are resolved. PPS would need to demonstrate a compelling public interest to move forward amid litigation.
The stakes are high. Portland Public Schools is under pressure to deliver long-delayed and over-budget high school modernization projects, following challenges at Benson Polytechnic and years of slow progress at Jefferson High School.
Internal instability has compounded concerns: the district’s Office of School Modernization is currently coping with significant staff turnover and 6 to 10 vacancies among key project leadership positions.
Procedeo, meanwhile, has already become embedded in district operations. One of its employees, Sarah Norman, has been serving as interim head of the Office of School Modernization and recently delivered a report outlining several potential ways to accelerate the Jefferson High School timeline. Despite this, some of those ideas had already been dismissed by the school community.
Public scrutiny intensified over Thanksgiving weekend, when board member Virginia La Forte posted concerns about the timing of the contract review, noting the staff memo was posted just before the holiday, leaving limited time for board and public examination. Former board member and current Multnomah County Commissioner Julia Brim-Edwards amplified those concerns, calling the deal “a heist of unprecedented size by a firm with a miniscule track record to justify the size of the contract.”
Their posts triggered a rapid and forceful response from district leadership. Board member Rashelle Chase-Miller wrote, “We have five full days with the contract before the vote. Questions have been submitted to staff and answered. I feel confident in the work that is being done, in the board’s ability to supervise the superintendent and in her ability to lead her team.”
Inside the district, however, not everyone is aligned. Senior project manager Kiesha Locklear publicly challenged the cost structure of the Procedeo agreement, noting that the proposed fee — representing 4% of project costs plus bonuses — is unusually high. As she wrote:
“Leadership’s memo claims that the ‘typical’ fee is 3-6% of construction costs. That is nowhere near accurate for K-12 capital work.”
She argued that much of the most intensive early-phase work has already been completed for the Jefferson, Cleveland, and Ida B. Wells projects:
“Paying top-dollar premiums once the hardest work is over does not align with industry practice or common sense.”
Turner & Townsend Heery’s complaint also pointed to inconsistencies in the district’s scoring system, including a zero score from one evaluator — a result Chomiak described as highly irregular:
“A zero is an impossible score, perhaps only achievable by not turning in materials, or appearing at the interview.”
The firm also challenged the district for allowing Norman—currently working at PPS through Procedeo—to supervise a member of the evaluation committee. Chomiak called this “an improper commingling of roles.”
In response, Williams acknowledged a math error in the scoring matrix but said it did not affect the final results, and he dismissed concerns about evaluator bias.
Turner & Townsend Heery has partnered with PPS since 2010, contributing to modernization work on Roosevelt, Franklin, Grant, McDaniel, Lincoln, and Benson. In contrast, if approved, this would be Procedeo’s first contract in Oregon. The company’s new Portland office is located in the Pearl District.
The board’s decision now carries weight beyond the construction itself — it has become a test of transparency, trust, and governance at a moment when the district faces rising infrastructure costs and ongoing public skepticism.
The vote is scheduled for Tuesday evening, but with rising tensions and the possibility of legal action, the future of the contract — and the modernization timeline — remains uncertain.
Originally reported by Julia Silverman | The Oregonian/OregonLive
