Recreation audit moves forward, 15 months after director’s exit

Date: May 08, 2025

A long-sought audit looking for “inappropriate” spending, among other things, by the previous director of Augusta Recreation and Parks is finally in the works.

The Augusta Commission on Tuesday voted unanimously, with no discussion, to hire UHY Advisors Mid-Atlantic, Inc., to conduct a detailed audit of the department at a not-to-exceed cost of $71,664.

The audit will cover the years 2021-2023 and must be completed in 90 days, according to city documents.

Maurice McDowell

“I’m just glad we got a Parks and Rec audit firm in place and ready to go. I’ve been wanting to see this done for quite some time, and it’s long overdue,” said Commissioner Catherine Smith Rice. 

MORE: Pinnacle Bank at Evans Towne Center rezoning approved by commissioners

Rice pushed to return the audit to the commission’s attention after the group debated an audit bid award for several months last year before voting to seek more bids.

The Tuesday vote comes almost a year since a commission committee approved hiring UHY at the same price.

Commissioners voted to seek an audit last year after the abrupt Feb. 13 resignation of Director Maurice McDowell, amid a scathing investigation into inappropriate conduct including discrimination, sexual harassment and fraternization.

The current request for proposals drew four compliant bid packages, from which a committee chose UHY, according to procurement documents. Not among the packages was one from Marcum LLP, the vendor preferred by several commissioners last year despite the firm’s higher price tag.

The bid tabulation said UHY scored the highest for its schedule of work, organization and approach, and lowest fee.

MORE: Augusta Land Bank Authority creating in-house nonprofit

What is audit looking for?

City procurement documents get specific about what the city is looking for in the audit. A set of questions posed last year by then-commissioner Sean Frantom is included. 

In the questions, areas to look at include the appropriate use of ledger codes, potentially deleted files, revenues and expenditures associated with the Riverwalk and other city parks and rental facilities as well as spending on vendors, contracts valued at less than $25,000, lawn care, consultants, jazz and travel.

In a set of vendor questions included in procurement documents, the city responds that the audit will determine if expenses were appropriately recorded and classified.

At one point, the city states the audit is simply the its “due diligence from a change in departmental leadership.”  Commissioners have also touted an audit as creating a clean slate for new department Director Tameka Williams.

To a vendor question about why the audit is being done, the city gets more specific.

“The commission is concerned that the previous director spent funds inappropriately,” the answer says.

MORE: Columbia County approvals resolution opposing Harlem annexation

What to Read Next

The Author

Susan McCord is a veteran journalist and writer who began her career at publications in Asheville, N.C. She spent nearly a decade at newspapers across rural southwest Georgia, then returned to her Augusta hometown for a position at the print daily. She’s a graduate of the Academy of Richmond County and the University of Georgia. Susan is dedicated to transparency and ethics, both in her work and in the beats she covers. She is the recipient of multiple awards, including a Ravitch Fiscal Reporting Fellowship, first place for hard news writing from the Georgia Press Association and the Morris Communications Community Service Award. **Not involved with Augusta Press editorials

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.