Home Part of States Newsroom
News
Fired administrator sues Tama County, alleging libel and defamation

Share

Fired administrator sues Tama County, alleging libel and defamation

Sep 24, 2026 | 3:24 pm ET
By Clark Kauffman
Fired administrator sues Tama County, alleging libel and defamation
Description
(Stock photo by Greenleaf123/Getty Images)

A former Tama County official, fired amid allegations of misusing county funds, is now suing the county’s board of supervisors for libel and defamation.

Former Tama County human resources manager Tammy Wise is suing supervisors Curt Hilmer, Mark Doland, David Turner, Heather Knebel and Curt Kupka in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.

Wise, who was hired by the county in February 2000, also served as the county’s insurance administrator. She alleges that in May 2022, citizens attended a county board meeting to complain about wind turbines and later formed an ad hoc group called Tama County Against Turbines, aiming to influence county policy regarding the devices.

The group also filed lawsuits against the county to pursue its goals and, as insurance administrator, Wise worked with the supervisors and the county’s insurance carrier to defend the county in those cases.

All five members of the current board of supervisors were members of TCAT or were sympathetic to its goals, the lawsuit alleges. In January 2025, soon after those supervisors were sworn in, the county hired an individual to perform an “audit” of Wise’s work.

On Feb. 3, 2025, the board allegedly went into an illegally closed meeting to discuss Wise’s performance, although Wise had not requested the meeting be closed to the public, according to the lawsuit.

After the closed session, the board voted to terminate Wise, alleging she may have benefitted financially by purchasing an a generator for her own use, with her own money, but without paying sales tax.

Wise’s termination letter alleged she had improperly accepted gifts, failed to have adequate knowledge of county policies, failed to administer the county’s Family Medical Leave, had negotiated a union agreement that violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and was not administering recruitment policies in accordance with state law.

“The allegations included in the termination letter are false,” the lawsuit alleges. “The board issued a press release that repeated the same falsehoods.”

Doland and Knebel then contacted the Office of Auditor of State and alleged Wise had received an “unwarranted discount” on her purchase of a generator and that Wise engaged in nepotism and did not properly post a vacant position later filled by her daughter.

The lawsuit claims Doland and Knebel also alleged that Wise, in her capacity as central point of coordination for Tama County, “stole personal property from clients,” including jewelry, a wallet and cash, and that she improperly used county funds to settle claims with former county employees, including her former husband, Craig Wise.

“These false statements and allegations were thereafter published in the audit conducted by (Auditor of State) Rob Sand,” the lawsuit claims.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for alleged libel and violations of Wise’s constitutional rights. A similar lawsuit was filed by Wise in state court last year but was dropped shortly before this week’s filing of the federal lawsuit.

The county has denied any wrongdoing in the matter and stated that the supervisors “held an honest belief that (Wise’s) performance was deficient which resulted in the decision to terminate her employment.”

A trial date has yet to be scheduled.

Earlier this year, the Auditor of State published a report identifying $251,200 in questionable spending by Tama County’s human resources department, led by Wise.

The state auditor’s report cited $81,376 in “questionable disbursements” of federal American Rescue Plan Act funds intended to provide assistance related to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as $1,183 of “improper disbursements” that included $417 paid to Wise and $526 in purchases made using the department’s credit card.

The majority of the questionable spending was tied to $168,710 in “unsupported disbursements” where there weren’t enough records kept to determine the nature of the purchases.