A federal lawsuit charging that the Honolulu Liquor Commission targeted LGBTQ+ businesses with excessive inspections and other forms of harassment is going to trial in December, after surviving a city request for summary judgment and dismissal last week.
The facts presented in the lawsuit, along with revelations in a June report exposing inadequate training of liquor inspectors, poor morale and organizational disarray, show that an extensive reworking of the commission is urgently necessary.
Enforceable, embedded safeguards against corruption and overstepping of authority are required, and a mechanism for ensuring neutrality and compliance with commission rules must be established and adhered to — whether that’s an ombudsman or appeals panel, suggestions so far rejected by the commission, or other transparent process.
Also necessary: A thorough modernization of the commission’s scanty and inadequate policies and procedures, job descriptions and salary classifications.
Readers with long memories might think these suggestions sound familiar. That’s because somewhat similar recommendations were indeed made in 2005, in the wake of a corruption scandal that snared eight employees of the Liquor Commission on federal charges. However, a follow-up audit in 2019 found few changes, while the commission rotated through administrators. That is why these reforms must be made mandatory, and a timeline established for achieving required changes.
The Liquor Commission exerts much influence over Honolulu’s economy and culture: It both licenses establishments that manufacture, import or sell liquor on Oahu; and verifies that these businesses meet licensing requirements by, for example, serving or selling alcohol only to customers 21 and over. Should commission actions allow unlawful businesses to continue operating, as corrupt former investigators were found to do at Honolulu “hostess bars,” or discriminate against a lawfully operating business, as is alleged in the current lawsuit, they hurt the City and County.
The federal lawsuit by Scarlet Honolulu, a Chinatown nightclub, and Gay Island Guide, an LGBTQ+ guide to the islands, accuses the Honolulu Liquor Commission and its investigators of a yearslong practice of anti-gay discrimination, seeking at least $5 million in damages. It’s now scheduled for trial on Dec. 5 — as a bench trial presided over by the same judge who just allowed the case to proceed, Chief U.S. District Judge Derrick K. Watson.
The lawsuit’s claims seem bolstered by the commission’s own records, which by their raw numbers show that there has been a disproportionate targeting of LGBTQ+ businesses for inspections and enforcement activities. As Watson stated in his order allowing the case to go to trial, the city and Liquor Commission had an opportunity to show why this disproportionate attention to LGBTQ+ establishments was justified — but they did not. That is extremely troubling.
Last week, with support from the mayor’s office, the Liquor Commission announced it was hiring Salvador “Sal” Petilos, a former director for the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control in Salt Lake City, as its next administrator. Petilos’ top priority must be to revamp this agency.
There are so many deficiencies that changes must take place along multiple fronts, including establishing job descriptions and training policies, recruiting capable and incorruptible staff, and requiring accountability by investigators and all staffers for their actions.
Public, continued focus on Liquor Commission performance is necessary to ensure follow-through by the City Council and city government. All must insist these changes be swiftly implemented, so that the commission’s decades-long failure to correct its course is not repeated.
