Former Augusta mayor has not paid thousands in ethics fines

Date: July 22, 2024

Former Augusta Mayor Hardie Davis Jr. was ordered to pay fines that total to $16,900 for campaign finance violations; however, officials with the State Ethics Commission say Davis has dragged his feet in paying up.

Haley Barrett, communications director of the  Ethics Commission, confirmed that the December 2023  ruling from Administrative Law Judge Kimberly Schroer still stands.

MORE: Grovetown gears up to begin Grovetown Depot project, inviting bids from contractors

“To date Mr. Davis has not paid his penalty. Payments will begin in August at $250.00 per month,” Barrett said in an email statement.

Davis was ordered to pay 23 individual civil penalties totaling $16,900 for late or never-filed campaign finance and personal financial disclosure reports, but the state has yet to see a dime.

Davis’ second term, which ended in 2022, was rife with controversy with his lavish spending, frequent trips, hiring actors who portrayed strippers for a video paid for by the city, alleged marital infidelity with a staff member and using a hidden bank account under the name “My Brother’s Keeper” to make personal purchases with taxpayer money.

Some of the fines go back several years, and Davis could have actually been fined an even higher amount as repeat violators can be fined up to $25,000 per offense. 

The State Ethics Commission launched two investigations into Davis’ conduct after his campaign was tied to a 2018 billboard campaign in support of building a new arena at the former Regency Mall site.

Davis agreed to enter a consent order and pay a $250 fine in the billboard case, but that fine was never paid and is now a part of the overall sum that he owes.

At the same time his campaign finance reports were being scrutinized, Davis dodged another bullet that could have eventually sent him to jail.

As mayor, Davis ordered a “self-imposed” audit that was provided to the Augusta Commission in July of 2021. The report found that Davis had violated state law with the use of a credit card, but the matter was never forwarded to law enforcement as the auditing firm later claimed that the audit was not actually an audit.

The report is referred to in the documents released as an internal audit, and it uses the word “audit” throughout. However, the author of the report is very clear that accounting firm Serotta Maddocks Evans & Co., did not perform an actual audit. Instead, the firm performed “consulting services.”

square ad for junk in the box

Dave Barbee, who initially exposed the former mayor’s use of “dark money” to fund the billboard campaign says he is surprised that the state went so lenient on Davis by allowing for a payment plan.

“He failed to do what was right as an elected mayor and the Ethics Commission gave him a lot of grace in giving him five years to pay it off. I just hope this time he does the right thing and doesn’t default,” Barbee said.

Scott Hudson is the Senior Investigative Reporter and Editorial Page Editor for The Augusta Press. Reach him at scott@theaugustapress.com

What to Read Next

The Author

Scott Hudson is an award winning investigative journalist from Augusta, GA who reported daily for WGAC AM/FM radio as well as maintaining a monthly column for the Buzz On Biz newspaper. Scott co-edited the award winning book "Augusta's WGAC: The Voice Of The Garden City For Seventy Years" and authored the book "The Contract On The Government."

Comment Policy

The Augusta Press encourages and welcomes reader comments; however, we request this be done in a respectful manner, and we retain the discretion to determine which comments violate our comment policy. We also reserve the right to hide, remove and/or not allow your comments to be posted.

The types of comments not allowed on our site include:

  • Threats of harm or violence
  • Profanity, obscenity, or vulgarity, including images of or links to such material
  • Racist comments
  • Victim shaming and/or blaming
  • Name calling and/or personal attacks;
  • Comments whose main purpose are to sell a product or promote commercial websites or services;
  • Comments that infringe on copyrights;
  • Spam comments, such as the same comment posted repeatedly on a profile.