Those who despair of an ethical state government, take heart. It turns out that things actually can change. At least, they changed at the State Liquor Authority, once as incompetent and dishonest an organization as existed in New York’s governmental structure.

Problems at the authority were documented in a series published by The Buffalo News in 2005. In its aftermath, Assistant Attorney General Dennis Rosen of Buffalo was named to lead an investigation of the authority—then, last August, was named its chairman by Gov. David A. Paterson. In just eight months, operations have improved dramatically.

Ask any establishment about getting a liquor license, and owners will tell you it’s been a nightmare. New restaurants can wait weeks and months to get a license, losing a valuable source of revenue. Under Rosen, the backlog has been eliminated in Buffalo and Albany. Downstate, it has been cut nearly in half, to 1,700 applications from 3,000. Rosen pledges to eliminate it by October.

A few years ago, State Sen. George Maziarz, R-Newfane, called for the authority to be abolished, so awful was its performance. Now, he is one of Rosen’s supporters. He is getting things done, Maziarz said.

Still, there is a long way to go, as a retired Liquor Authority investigator observed. There, said Chester Menkiena, “everything is broken.”

The News’ 2005 series revealed that under former Gov. George E. Pataki, the State Liquor Authority levied more fines than it did in the Cuomo administration but rarely used its power to cancel or revoke liquor licenses. It would launch investigations of distributors only when a retailer complained, but given the power of distributors to retaliate by not providing products, few retailers were willing to speak up.

What is more, The News found that investigators ignored flagrant violations of laws prohibiting incentives to retailers and banning wholesalers from charging different prices to different retailers for the same product. The public saw no benefit, since those retailers that pay lower prices can’t legally acknowledge it.

Rosen wants the state to give the authority more power to run the agency without interference from the state. Given the job Rosen has done so far, that would not be a bad idea —as long as the next director is as able and committed as Rosen, and that’s a big “if,” so that should be considered very carefully.

Meanwhile, Rosen already is planning for the possibility that the state will allow the sale of wine in grocery stores, winning a promise from the state Budget Division for $1.2 million to hire 20 new employees.

It’s all good news and, if reforming a state authority is vastly different from reforming the State Legislature— which has no interest in cleaning up its act, anyway—it at least offers a glimmer of hope. All it takes, apparently, are people like Rosen, who understand what needs to be done and who have the nerve to do it.