Inspector shortage hurts eateries

Monday, September 28, 1998

Inspector shortage hurts eateries

RATINGS: Grades could bring businesses success but also hurt
restaurants

By Pauline Vu

Daily Bruin Contributor

What Noodle Planet owner John Mekpongsatorn remembers most is
the shame.

There was the shame of having to post his restaurant’s health
inspection score – 53 points out of 100 possible – on his window
for the world to see.

There was the shame of dealing with customers who refused to pay
for "dirty food."

And that distinct, painful shame of seeing passersby gagging at
the grade in disgust.

"I’ve had people laugh, jeer and point at the score. Once I even
saw a guy taking a picture of his friends posing with it,"
Mekpongsatorn said.

Two weeks later, Mekpongsatorn had, among other corrections,
learned what the Health Department considers the proper method of
defrosting, replaced the broken tile in front of his refrigerator
and repainted the ceiling of his upstairs store room, where he had
been docked two points because the paint was peeling.

And despite his explanations to customers that many of his
violations had been minor and offers to allow them to inspect the
kitchen themselves, business dropped.

Noodle Planet was recently upgraded to an A grade. Business
immediately picked up, and the only remaining shadow was a few
snide comments about the new grade.

Questions such as "How much did you pay for the sign?" and
"Where’d you steal it?" bombarded Mekpongsatorn.

"We earned this score," he replied.

The Los Angeles County Health Department didn’t foresee problems
like Mekpongsatorn’s when it adopted the new restaurant grading
system earlier this year.

The system emerged after CBS filmed the kitchens of several Los
Angeles restaurants and aired what they found.

The footage was appalling: food consistently cooked at
dangerously low temperatures, cockroaches in places where food was
cooked, and, in one particularly nauseating scene, an employee who
picked his nose while handling food.

Public outcry and hundreds of calls to the Health Department
convinced the department to make sweeping changes in the way its
inspectors work.

Two weeks after the television special aired, 46 restaurants in
the county were closed down. Many of the closures were temporary,
allowing the restaurants time to fix their problems before
reopening. A few of those closures were permanent.

Some temporary closure violations – in which a restaurant is
closed for at least 48 hours to fix their problems – include vermin
and excessive sewage.

The county’s Board of Supervisors then voted unanimously to
implement a system that awards points and forces restaurants to
post their grades, similar to systems in San Diego and Riverside
counties.

Restaurants are scored on a 100-point scale and given
corresponding letter grades – 90 to 100 points is an A, 80 to 89 is
a B, 70 to79 is a C, and anything below 70 is simply given a number
score.

Under the old system, a restaurant was noted simply for its
number of violations and how crucial they were, and given an
Excellent, Good, Fair, or Poor rating.

However, the public remained largely uninformed of the
restaurant’s health situation under the old system.

The new system was created "to empower the public to make a
decision on whether or not to patronize a place," said Terrance
Powell, chief environmental health specialist for the West
District.

"I think it’s a good idea," said Gerald Sequeira, a fourth-year
civil engineering student. "I feel more confident going into a
restaurant knowing the score they got, because I know what I’m
getting into."

Although he prefers A and B grades, Sequeira said he wouldn’t
automatically stop going to a restaurant with a C grade if it were
inexpensive. He draws the line, however, at anything lower.

"A number score is bad. They don’t even give them a letter,"
Sequeira said.

Mekpongsatorn estimated that he lost nearly 25 percent of his
business during the time he had the low score posted in his
window.

"Regardless of what you’ve corrected, the poor score remains
until the next inspection. That’s one aspect I feel is unfair and
unjust," he said.

Noodle Planet was supposed to receive another routine inspection
within the four months following the first one. Nearly seven months
later, an inspector finally showed up – not the usual inspector,
but one responding to a complaint from a customer who got sick
after eating at the restaurant.

Issues such as taking too long to re-inspect restaurants are
being addressed by the Health Department. Many restaurants feel the
inspections are too few and far between because of the shortage of
inspectors.

Arturo Aguirre, director of environmental health for the county,
said that the department just hired 26 inspectors earlier this
month and plans to hire more next month.

If a restaurant does want to be re-graded, instead of waiting
for a routine inspection, they can pay $161 and be inspected
then.

"This was a provision we created in response to industry
concerns that the grades did not always reflect conditions that
exist normally," Aguirre said. "Maybe we showed up on a day when
they were short on staff."

Gypsy Cafe, whose grade was raised from 69 to A, was one of 54
restaurants who requested a reinspection and got one.

Others, like First Szechuan Wok, were denied.

"Even if you want to pay, they still don’t have any people to
come," said Steve Chang, owner of First Szechuan Wok, who has been
calling the health department since last June. He expects to
challenge his C grade any day now.

Some of his restaurant’s violations include allowing employees
to drink water in the kitchen and not labeling containers of
ingredients, such as salt and corn starch, but there were no
food-related ones.

"If there was anything at all wrong with the food, the Health
Department would close my restaurant down immediately," Chang
said.

Some restaurants claim they scored poorly because the inspectors
came during lunch time.

"During busy hours, it’s difficult to maintain a perfectly clean
kitchen with the amount of volume going through," Mekpongsatorn
said.

This, however, carries little weight with the Health
Department.

"Part of the job is to observe a restaurant in operation. We
can’t just come when (owners) would like to have us there," Aguirre
said.

Most of the time, though, health inspectors come just before or
right after lunch, Aguirre added.

The most common complaint among owners seemed to be that the
grading is just too tough.

"If you look at the new rules, our grade was a fair grade. I
just feel there’s always a gray area," Mekpongsatorn said. "Some of
the items they mark you off for are non food-related, such as
structural problems."

If, for example, a restaurant has one broken tile (-2 points),
peeling paint (-2 points), no towels in the towel dispenser (-4
points), lights without light shields (-2 points) and an employee
who forgot to wear a hair net (-2 points), it’s already out of the
running for an A grade.

Joseph Melamed, owner of Gypsy Cafe, said the structural marks
are also tough ones to make, especially when, during the first
inspection, his restaurant was amidst of heavy construction, and
received a 69 score as a result.

"They said they had to inspect anyway but would come back again
when we were ready," he said, "But I don’t think a broken tile
really affects the health of my customers."

Powell points out that numerous broken tiles still only means a
deduction of two points.

"If a restaurant received a C and got marked off for broken
tiles, then their points are still coming off cumulatively for a
lot of diverse things," Powell said.

Keeping up with the new standards has been expensive for
restaurants. Gypsy Cafe received its A grade, but did so at a high
cost.

"We decided no matter what the cost, we didn’t want those low
points, and we’d renovate to be comparable to newer (Westwood)
restaurants like BJ’s and Jerry’s," said Melamed, who spent over
$25,000 in renovations.

The Health Department has added another cost, demanding that, by
the year’s end, all restaurants have at least one certified food
handler present during all business hours.

Therefore, a restaurant must put at least two employees through
a certified food handling class that might cost anywhere from $100
to $150.

Although most restaurant owners say it is the toughness of the
grading they do not like, one restaurant owner did not agree with
the posting of the sign at all.

"I am absolutely, with all my heart, against it, even though I
have my A (grade). I agree with the health consciousness of people,
but to destroy people’s business? A low grade hurts," Melamed
said.

Although most restaurants actually approve of posting the
grades, restaurants and health inspectors alike agree that the
grade alone does not present an adequate picture of food
quality.

"The score in the window is not just food preparation. It
includes the interior and fixtures and more. The general public
will see a score, and everything about that restaurant is reflected
in that score," Mekpongsatorn said.

Other Westwood Village restaurants have no complaints
whatsoever. Lamonica’s NY Pizza, which boasts an A grade, was
helped by the new system.

Shortly after their grade was posted, Lamonica’s cut a deal with
the UCLA Medical Center to sell their pizza there by the slice.
Sales rose 10 percent, and tons of calls came in congratulating the
restaurant.

Fernando Ornelas, Lamonica’s manager, said the new system,
including grading a restaurant’s physical structure, is much better
for the public.

"It has to be like that. I want to go to a place that’s safe.
Restaurants should be making sure their walls and tiles are clean,"
he said.

Students may wonder why some UCLA restaurants and cafeterias are
not being graded. Powell says that since UCLA restaurants are state
property and owned by ASUCLA, ASUCLA has its own registered
environmental health specialist to inspect its eating
facilities.

Privately owned companies on campus, such as Panda Express
(which received an A), must still undergo an inspection by the
Health Department.

UCLA facilities must still abide by the California Health and
Safety Code, however, and the Health Department would immediately
intervene in any case of food poisoning.

Restaurant owners agreed that the new system is an improvement,
in terms of involving the public.

Mekpongsatorn said the program is good, as "it makes all
restaurant owners understand that you always have to be up to
par."

Melamed added that the system was "more healthy and absolutely
correct. It might be very hard, but you’re playing with the health
of people."

The lasting legacy of the new point and grade system is simply
that it persuades or forces restaurants to improve their sanitation
conditions.

Powell reiterated the importance of reading a restaurant’s grade
at face value.

"The grade is a gauge for people to have an idea, but people
really have to ask the restaurant owners for a copy of the health
report and see exactly how the restaurant got that score.

"People may decide to eat only at A and B restaurants, but if
you look at C reports, you’ll see that some violations are not that
critical," Powell said.

Related site:

“¢bull;Westwood merchants get graded

Comments, feedback, problems?

© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]