CopyCited 9 times | Published | Supreme Court of Georgia | Feb 21, 1994 | 263 Ga. 827, 94 Fulton County D. Rep. 642
...CGRDC is a "regional development center" as defined in OCGA §
50-8-31 (22). DCA's authority to conduct a performance audit of CGRDC derives from a 1989 enactment, which provides that DCA "shall conduct a performance audit of each regional development center at least once every three years." OCGA §
50-8-39....
...The case was heard by the trial court sitting without a jury. As to CGRDC, the trial court found that DCA was authorized to conduct a full performance audit, inclusive of such of CGRDC's books and records as predated the 1989 effective date of OCGA §
50-8-39....
...A, CADDAI nevertheless contends that none of its books and records which predate the 1992 effective date of that statute are accessible to DCA. Likewise, CGRDC contends that none of its books and records which predate the 1989 effective date of OCGA §
50-8-39 are accessible to DCA. OCGA §§
50-8-35 (f) (3) and
50-8-39 authorize DCA to conduct a "performance audit." However, neither statute designates the scope of those materials which are to be provided to DCA in connection with such an audit....
...CA's current statutory mandate to conduct such audits necessarily includes authorized access to CADDAI's and CGRDC's pre-enactment books and records. CADDAI and CGRDC urge, however, that construing DCA's authority under OCGA §§
50-8-35 (f) (3) and
50-8-39 this broadly gives those statutes retroactive operation....
...Colquitt County,
169 Ga. 534, 536 (150 SE 841) (1929). However, construing the statutes as mandating DCA's access to pre-enactment books and records is not violative of this "settled rule" of statutory construction. Under this construction, OCGA §§
50-8-35 (f) (3) and
50-8-39 operate prospectively only, insofar as DCA's authority to conduct a "performance audit" is concerned....
...peration. "A statute does not operate retrospectively because it relates to antecedent facts...." Ross v. Lettice,
134 Ga. 866, 868 (68 SE 734) (1910). CADDAI and CGRDC further urge that construing DCA's authority under OCGA §§
50-8-35 (f) (3) and
50-8-39 so broadly as to authorize access to pre-enactment books and records would be violative of the constitutional proscription against passage of retroactive laws....
...creates a new obligation, imposes a new duty, or attaches a new liability in *831 respect to transactions or considerations already past, must be deemed retrospective." Ross v. Lettice, supra at 868. However, neither OCGA §
50-8-35 (f) (3) nor OCGA §
50-8-39 impose any new obligation, duty or liability upon CADDAI or CGRDC with respect to their pre-enactment transactions....
...Thus, it is merely CADDAI's and CGRDC's books and records relating to their pre-enactment transactions, not the underlying pre-enactment transactions themselves, which are potentially affected by the statutes. Prior to enactment of OCGA §§
50-8-35 (f) (3) and
50-8-39, there was admittedly a lack of statutory authority upon which DCA could premise its right of access to those books and records....
...514, 516 (339 SE2d 752) (1986). Accordingly, a construction of DCA's statutory authority to conduct a "performance audit" as necessarily including its authorized access to CADDAI's and CGRDC's pre-enactment books and records does not give OCGA §§
50-8-35 (f) (3) and
50-8-39 unwarranted retroactive operation and is not otherwise violative of the constitutional proscription against passage of retroactive laws....
...Since the expert testimony shows that this is the construction given to the term "performance audit" in the field of accounting, it is the proper construction to be given to that term as it was employed by the legislature in OCGA §§
50-8-35 (f) (3) and
50-8-39....
