(Photo by Getty Images)
A City of Roland official who was fired this year for bypassing public-bidding procedures on $1 million worth of city contracts is now working for the City of Nevada.
According to state records, Nathan Hovick worked for the City of Roland as public works director from March 2010 through June 2024, when he was fired.
The records show that in early 2023, the City of Roland was awarded $1 million in federal funds through the American Rescue Plan Act to make improvements to the city’s water distribution system. As public works director, Hovick was in charge of overseeing the expenditure of the money in payments to contractors.
Although he was required to obtain approval from the Roland City Council prior to entering into any contracts, and was required to offer solicit contracts through a public bidding process, Hovick allegedly ignored both requirements, according to state records.
Nathan Hovick (Photo courtesy the City of Nevada)
In March of this year, city officials learned Hovick had awarded contracts on the project to a local company without first putting the work up for bids. He had allegedly tried to circumvent the legal requirements for bidding by breaking up the work into smaller-sized contracts in amounts that didn’t meet the $196,000 threshold for mandatory bidding, state records show.
In June, the Roland City Council voted unanimously to fire Hovick, citing the alleged violation of bidding laws, which was characterized as the misappropriation of public funds through subterfuge.
According to the minutes of the council meeting, the council met in open session for two minutes, then adjourned. “After the meeting was adjourned, residents wanted some answers,” the minutes state. “The mayor and city council stayed to answer questions they could.” None of the questions or answers are reported in the meeting minutes.
After his firing, Hovick applied for unemployment benefits. The city challenged that request and a hearing on the matter was held before Administrative Law Judge Duane Golden in late August.
Recently, Golden ruled Hovick was not entitled to benefits, finding that he had “violated Iowa’s bidding laws and misappropriated funds by subterfuge, and he awarded government contracts to businesses without prior approval from his employer.” Such conduct, Golden ruled, amounted to a “willful or wanton disregard” of the city’s interests.
Hovick’s subsequent hiring by the City of Nevada as a “water operator” was announced through a Sept. 3 press release in which the city stated Hovick’s “favorite meal is pizza without veggies” and that Hovick says he has been described by others as “brutally honest,” while adding that “whether that’s good or bad depends on the situation.”
Hovick also serves on the Story County Board of Adjustment.
Other Iowans whose unemployment cases were recently decided by a judge include:
— Tamara Carel, who worked for the Southern Iowa Economic Development Association/SIEDA Community Action until she was fired in June for allegedly making repeated, demeaning and inappropriate statements about families in need whom she served as part of her job. On March 21, Carel was counseled that a Facebook comment she made referencing the need to get people “off welfare” could be seen by her clients as offensive. On May 6, she was given a warning for inappropriate conduct after she allegedly stated in a public place that she hated her job, which entailed giving documents to women seeking public assistance.
In June, after a meeting with her supervisors in which she allegedly used language the organization deemed offensive, such as calling immigrants “illegals,” Carel was fired. She then applied for unemployment benefits and at a recent hearing on the matter, she argued that she heard certain politicians use such terminology and felt she should be able to use it as well. Administrative Law Judge Blair Bennett disagreed and ruled Carel was ineligible for benefits, noting that she had been warned her language was unacceptable “even though she may have heard it in other arenas.”
— Kemi Brown, who worked for the Iowa Department of Veterans Affairs as a full-time social worker until she was fired in June while still on probationary status. She was fired after leaving her department vehicle unlocked while making a delivery to a residential facility. The car was stolen but recovered later that same day. Brown was awarded unemployment benefits, with the judge finding the incident represented an isolated instance of poor judgment.
— Semehar Arguello, who worked for the City of Sioux City as its community inclusion liaison until she was fired in May when city officials found what they considered “significant evidence” that she had been using the city’s technology to advertise and conduct business for a personal, commercial enterprise of her own. In addition, she was found to be making audio recordings of privileged legal communications with the city attorney.
The city then discovered an unauthorized, motion-activated, wi-fi-enabled camera in Arguello’s office, and learned that it had been operating continuously on the city’s wi-fi network since December 2023. The camera was capturing both audio and video when activated, and may have captured communications involving city law enforcement personnel, the city alleged.
Those issues came to light while the city was investigating Arguello for helping individuals file work-related complaints with the Iowa Civil Rights Commission even though their employer was a South Dakota company outside the Iowa commission’s jurisdiction.
After filing for unemployment, Arguello collected $2,408 in benefits. An administrative law judge recently ruled Arguello was not entitled to unemployment and must repay the benefits already collected.
— Lawrence Holmes, who worked for the City of Des Moines as a fulltime recreation leader who oversaw summertime activities for youth until he was fired in June. The city alleged Holmes used inappropriate language and threatened the children he was charged with watching.
At his subsequent unemployment-benefits hearing, Holmes reportedly testified that when he was with the children on the day of scheduled water-ballon and squirt-gun fights, he stated, “Nobody better squirt me or I’m gonna drown somebody.” When the children were acting up, Holmes allegedly testified he told them, “Stop, or I’ll put one of these on you,” while holding up a fist.
Holmes also is alleged to have admitted saying that he’d break some of the kids’ legs after a bus driver instructed the children not to put their legs into the aisle. One parent complained Holmes called her child a “mother—–” and a “little bastard.” Another parent alleged Holmes got in her face on multiple occasions and challenged her for bringing sick kids to camp.
“I’m not saying I didn’t get in her face,” Holmes allegedly testified. “That’s just me.”
The administrative law judge in the case, Blair Bennett, ruled that while the 80-year-old Holmes may have had an “old school” approach to disciplinary matters involving children, the city “could not be associated with a person who admitted to telling young children that he’d break their legs if they were in the aisles of a bus – whether he was teasing or not.” Holmes was denied benefits.