Christine Drazan’s Oregon nonprofit paid nearly $100,000 to a consulting company she owns with her husband, even though the group had no documented conflict-of-interest policy when the payments were made. The arrangement is now drawing scrutiny as Drazan campaigns for governor again, putting a nonprofit paper trail into a live statewide race.
According to OregonLive, A New Direction paid Drazan Group LLC $54,000 for stakeholder engagement in 2023 and another $42,000 in 2024. The consulting firm is owned by Christine and Daniel Drazan, and the nonprofit listed the payments under the interested-persons section of its tax filings, identifying marriage as the relationship involved.
The Paper Trail Was Disclosed But The Policy Wasn’t
Publicly available IRS filing data shows A New Direction reported no conflict-of-interest policy on its 2024 Form 990. The same filing identified the organization as an active 501(c)(4), listed three voting board members with two described as independent, and reported $165,000 in revenue against $171,000 in expenses, according to IRS filing data compiled by Philanthropy.org.
A New Direction was launched by Drazan in 2023 after her unsuccessful 2022 campaign for governor. The payments occurred in 2023 and 2024, before she returned to elected office, but the timing now matters because Drazan is the Republican nominee facing Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek in November, as reported by OPB.
The nonprofit’s board told OregonLive that A New Direction followed applicable IRS rules and operated with “complete transparency.” The board also said Daniel Drazan never voted to approve the payments and that Christine Drazan’s nonprofit work did not overlap with periods when she was seeking office; outside observers cited in the report said insider transactions can still create heightened concerns about self-dealing and public trust.
What Federal Nonprofit Rules Cover
Federal law does not automatically prohibit a 501(c)(4) organization from doing business with an insider or an insider-owned company. But the Internal Revenue Service says 501(c)(4) organizations cannot allow their net earnings to inure to private individuals, and excess-benefit transactions can trigger excise taxes.
IRS guidance also recommends written conflict procedures that require insiders to disclose their interests and step away from decisions involving those interests. The agency’s Form 990 instructions point to independent approval, comparable pricing and documentation as safeguards for compensation and related-party transactions, making the unanswered questions here less about whether a payment can ever happen and more about how the $96,000 arrangement was evaluated.
Oregon Ethics Law Is A Separate Layer
The Oregon Government Ethics Commission says public officials are personally responsible for disclosing conflicts and avoiding the use of public office for personal gain. Because Drazan was not an elected official when the nonprofit made the payments, the state’s public-official rules do not by themselves answer whether the 2023 and 2024 transactions satisfied federal nonprofit governance standards, though Drazan’s current office and campaign make the issue politically relevant.
For voters, the distinction is straightforward even if the accounting is not: a disclosed insider transaction can be lawful, but it still benefits from independent review and a written conflict policy. Drazan’s nonprofit says it followed federal rules; its filings show the policy gap, and the 2026 governor’s race ensures the $96,000 paper trail will remain part of the conversation.
.jpg){kind=link}