Wedding company’s bid
for champagne license
still on ice

By Mary Adamski
Star-Bulletin

The Honolulu Liquor Commission said a unanimous amen to the earlier denial of liquor service at a Kapahulu wedding business.

But not before it heard a commission employee cast some doubt on the neighborhood petition that forced refusal of the Gloria Bridal Chapel application.

The chapel's attorney indicated the company may not take that amen as the last word. It may appeal to state court because it wasn't given the opportunity to verify signatures on the petition, said Peter L. Yee.

It's been three months since the Japan-based business lost its bid for a license, which it said would cover only champagne at receptions but which opponents feared would allow full bar service.

The matter was before the commission again yesterday because the opposing Kapahulu Neighbors insisted that commissioners consider more petition signatures. The names would raise the opposition from 53.1 percent to 66 percent of the surrounding neighbors, said spokeswoman Marguerite Ige.

Commissioners denied the unusual appeal, as they did an earlier appeal from Gloria Bridal.

To a question from Yee, liquor investigator George Pacheco said he now questions the accuracy of some names on the petition. What raised doubt, he said, was when some 20 letters sent by the company to petitioners' addresses were returned by the post office.

The explanation, said Ige, is that some petitioners were owners who gave addresses of their properties but don't live or receive mail there.

Pacheco provided insight for commissioners and observers into the complex process of complying with the law providing that property owners and registered voters within 500 feet of the premises must be notified of a license application. If a majority of them oppose the application, it is automatically defeated.

State real property tax maps and voter registration records are checked but are often out of date because of the mobile population and government agency recording lags, he said.

Even if the case doesn't go to court, the application could be brought to the Liquor Commission again after a year. The law requires that the applicant prove that there has been some significant change since it was denied a license.