AG Report: Governor’s office fired Isaac Choy for threatening Audit of CNHA’s $27M HTA Contract
by Andrew Walden
Is the Governor’s Office just a tool to protect CNHA’s financial secrets from auditors?
Akamai readers will remember former State Rep Isaac Choy is suing the State and the Hawaii Tourism Authority (HTA) for retaliation, after being placed on unpaid leave and perp-walked out of his office, May 9, 2025.
Choy, an accountant, had been HTA’s Vice President of Finance and Interim Chief Administrative Officer, but he made the mistake of investigating corruption by Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement (CNHA—now doing business as ‘Hawaiian Council’)--a key ally of Governor Josh Green.
Court documents allege that Choy was then illegally fired, September 5, 2025, on the written order of Green’s Chief of Staff, Brooke Wilson.
Now, a UIPA request from the Public First Law Center, has pried loose a copy of the “Investigative Report” commissioned by the State Attorney General’s office May 12, 2025—three days after Choy’s forced leave of absence. The completed report was submitted August 23, 2025, just two weeks before Choy was formally terminated.
AUDIT FEAR
The report indicates that in spite of all the chatter about ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’ it was only when Choy threatened an audit of CNHA’s $27M HTA contact that CNHA CEO Joe Kuhio Lewis became “fed-up.” (pg 32) Lewis then solved his audit problem by soliciting the negative workplace complaints against Choy which then became the excuse for Choy’s ouster.
Oddly, Lewis’ name is redacted throughout the report in spite of the redaction being identified as “CNHA CEO, [REDACTED]” on page 32 and "the head of CNHA, [REDACTED]" on page 33.
The 584 page report is locked in an un-searchable and un-copyable format which thwarts all but the most diligent investigators. But in-between the desultory accounts of bimbo eruptions, drums, and smoke signals, the real timeline emerges -- and it is all about CNHA “getting paid.”
Here are a few key passages which tell the story:
September, 2023
[REDACTED] began to have concerns about Choy in August or September of 2023. Shortly before signing the CNHA contract with HTA, [REDACTED] that Choy said that as soon as the CNHA signed the contract, he was going to “slap” CNHA with a contract violation for failure to maintain a current business registration. When [REDACTED] heard this, [REDACTED] researched the issue and found that CNHA was not in violation with their registration.
According to DCCA BREG, CNHA filed its 2023 business registration on August 24, 2023—right in the middle of this timeline. More significantly, Sept 15, 2023 was HTA boss John DeFries’ last day. DeFries had been the conduit for HTA’s CNHA contracts. With him gone, CNHA could have been vulnerable to whistleblowers within HTA.
After the contract signing, Choy pulled [REDACTED] aside and told [REDACTED] that their business registration was delinquent. [REDACTED] told Choy that it was not delinquent. Later, during a meeting, Choy made a comment about “dumb Hawaiians,” and then bragged about finding ways to hold CNHA in violation of the contract. He threatened to slow CNHA down with 'administrative paperwork so that CNHA was forced into non-compliance.
The report found these complaints to be unsubstantiated.
There were issues with HTA paying CNHA’s invoices timely. [REDACTED] was adamant that [REDACTED] was sending the invoices to Choy's team on time, but Choy said that [REDACTED] was not submitting the invoices on time. Additionally, Choy used his authority to demand additional documentation from CNHA, even though contractually, the payment should be made when the contract manager, who was [REDACTED], approved the work and the invoice. Choy requested numerous documents, such as staffing levels, timecards for specific personnel, leave records, payroll records, and unemployment forms. CNHA was told that these documents were needed to informally audit the caliber of CNHA and ensure they could manage the $27 million contract. [REDACTED] asked other contractors, Hawaii Visitors and Convention Bureau (“HVCB”), Hawaii Tourism Japan, Hawaii Tourism China, Hawaii Tourism Oceana, Hawaii Tourism Canada, and Hawaii Tourism Europe, if Choy was requesting this type of information from them, and they said they did not have to submit that type of information.
2024—Joe Kuhio Lewis gets ‘fed up’
In 2024, Choy approached the CNHA CEO, [REDACTED], and told [REDACTED] that [REDACTED] better watch out because CNHA was getting audited that year. The CEO was “fed up” with Choy and asked [REDACTED] to write up the concerns they has about Choy and give them to [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] took CNHA’s invoices from [REDACTED] and gave them to Choy, who then processed $2 million of CNHA’s invoices in the months before [REDACTED] left HTA. – Exhibit 6.0…
Interestingly, the report shows that when top HTA bosses wanted to do ‘whatever it takes to get CNHA paid’—they put Choy on the job and he got the job done.
2023 or 2024
[REDACTED] did not hear Choy talk about defunding projects because of their Hawaiian culture. Choy supported defunding projects that could not meet their key performance indicators, measurable statistics, and return on investments, which would be contracts handled by CNHA, HVCB, Hawaiian Tourism Japan, and HVCB Meetings Conventions and Incentives. If they were not meeting their established measurables or return on investments, Choy wanted to terminate their contracts. In 2023 or 2024, the head of CNHA, [REDACTED] called [REDACTED] and asked him if as "prejudiced" against Hawaiians. [REDACTED] asked why [REDACTED] said that and said that CNHA's invoices were not being paid and he heard that Choy was holding up the payment of their invoices because Choy did not like Hawaiians. [REDACTED] told [REDACTED] that Choy was an "asshole," but he was an "equal-opportunity asshole.” [REDACTED] that if CNHA followed whatever Choy set forth for payments, he would get paid. [REDACTED] checked in with [REDACTED] later and [REDACTED] told him that Choy was helping them, and they were getting paid. – Exhibit 38.0
2024 - 2025
After CNHA was awarded the contract, Choy went to [REDACTED] and told him that the accounting deliverables were "a mess." [REDACTED] told Choy to send [REDACTED] to CNHA to set out the expectations on the contract. [REDACTED] spent two weeks there and when [REDACTED] followed up, Choy said everything was good. Choy did not say anything about cancelling the contract. Then in 2025, [REDACTED] went to [REDACTED] and said that CNHA had not been paid $4 million that they were owed, and some invoices were over 400 days past due. [REDACTED] met with [REDACTED]. [REDACTED] took [REDACTED] off the contract and put Choy on the contract. [REDACTED] told Choy to do whatever it took to get CNHA paid. Over two weekends, Choy got CNHA paid. -- Exhibit 32.0.
Choy is the one who got CNHA paid. Obviously all the talk of ‘racism’ and ‘sexism’ is a smokescreen. Therefore, CNHA’s real concern is the audit.
Summary of Choy's Response
Choy did not require additional paperwork outside the specifications of the contract. It was not Choy's job to withhold payments nor check the deliverables. It was [REDACTED] job to withhold payments if deliverables were not received. [REDACTED] withheld payments to CNHA because it was lacking monthly reports, quarterly reports and additional information. This was all documented and the correct protocols were used. – Exhibit 39.0
CONCLUSION: ‘Not Substantiated’
--Requesting Additional Information Prior to Payment
[REDACTED] also said that Choy requested numerous documents that were not required from other vendors. Choy said that he did not require additional paperwork outside the specifications in the contact. [REDACTED] said that HTA required all vendors to provide progress reports and expense reports. However, [REDACTED] required financial reports from CNHA, which [REDACTED] did not require for other contracts. [REDACTED] said that Choy requested this information because CNHA was a newer organization with one of the biggest contracts. [REDACTED] also said that [REDACTED] could have required this type of information for other contracts and had in the past. In fact, [REDACTED] did not have any issues with the information [REDACTED] was requesting because they had a substantial contract with HTA and CNHA was a new contractor to HTA. Thus, it is likely that Choy and/or [REDACTED] were not unreasonably requesting additional information from CNHA when they submitted invoices.
…
the facts did not support that Choy made comments about finding ways to hold CNHA in violation of the contract, that Choy held up payments, or Choy unreasonably requested additional information from CNHA when they submitted invoices, which makes it less likely that Choy was treating CNHA differently because of anti-Hawaiian sentiment.
Based on this analysis, it is more likely than not that Choy did not hold one contractor to different performance expectations and reporting requirements, withhold or delay the release of funds, threaten an audit, and/or interfere with the contractor’s work because of anti-Hawaiian sentiment.
And yet, the Governor’s Office terminated Choy just two weeks after receiving this report.
What is it about CNHA’s $27M HTA contract that the Governor’s Office, CNHA, and HTA are trying to hide from auditors?
---30---
CHOY TERMINATION BACKGROUND:
CNHA BACKGROUND: