Health code violations spark debate in MoHi

From the crisp napkins folded into water glasses and cheerful orange walls, you can’t tell that Harlem’s Café 2115 racked up 41 violation points in its last health inspection.

But it’s one of the restaurants implicated in a recent amNY report which found that Morningside Heights restaurants had the highest percentage of failing grades on the city’s health inspections, with 10 of 50 restaurants inspected receiving a “C” grade or worse.

Whether Morningside is really home to more dirty dining than the rest of Manhattan is still a matter of debate. According to health department data, only about 11 percent of the restaurants inspected in the 10027 zip code, which is closer to Columbia, have earned a “C” or worse, compared to 20 percent of the zip code the report focuses on, 10026, which is mostly located east of Morningside Park.

And while the department has inspected 50 restaurants in 10026, it has inspected nearly triple that number in 10027 since fall 2009.

That doesn’t discount the violations at 10026’s Café 2115, whose list of infractions from its original Jan. 20 inspection include “critical violations” like cold food items being held above 41 degrees, contaminated or improperly discarded food, and lack of proper hand-washing facilities. Inspectors also observed tobacco use, eating, or drinking from an open container in the restaurant’s food preparation, food storage or dishwashing areas.

But leaning against a counter in his restaurant, between 114th and 115th streets on Frederick Douglass Boulevard, owner Abraham Fofanah tells a different story.

“We haven’t done our [re]inspection yet,” he said, referring to a second inspection owners can request if they contest their initial grade. “We know we can make it. We look forward to getting an ‘A.’”

Closer to campus, Hungarian Pastry Shop on Amsterdam Avenue received 27 violation points in its inspection last October, a borderline “B” grade, partly because of its infamous roaming cat.

“‘B’ is a passing rating – it means conditions are sanitary,” Philip Binioris, the pastry shop’s manager, said. “Up to grade, you’re allowed to continue serving and operating. We don’t look at it as a threat or necessarily a downgrade. It’s an incentive for us to improve our sanitary and health conditions since it affects its image.”

“Many people think the system is for the benefit of the customers, but the system is mostly an incentive for businesses,” he added.

Image certainly matters to Dawn Smith, SEAS ’14, who said she usually checks health inspection grades when she’s trying a new place.

“That makes me a little nervous,” she said of 10026’s higher percentage of low grades. “I like to check the health inspection grades. Sometimes I don’t eat there if it’s not posted.”

Questan’s, a seafood restaurant on the same block as Café 2115, is another restaurant in the 10026 area. A health department report for its most recent inspection last November gave the restaurant an “A” but also listed critical violations like evidence of mice and flies.

But executive chef Christopher Burgess said health inspections can be a bit harsh.

“We had six fruit flies once,” he said of a downtown restaurant where he used to work. “They gave us $50 for each fly – $50! In other cases, an inspector might say, ‘This is what you should do.’”
Burgess said it’s too early to tell whether 10026 is truly performing worse than neighboring zip codes in sanitation inspections.

“This is almost like restaurant row,” he said of Frederick Douglass Boulevard, pointing out that not all of the area’s restaurants have been inspected. “I don’t think it’s a zip code thing, I think it’s a restaurant thing,” he said.

Maurizio Massa, who manages Max Soha on Amsterdam, agreed that it’s hard to tell whether 10026 has a disproportionate percentage of restaurants with failing grades on first inspection.
“It’s probably case by case,” he said. “It’s hard to generalize for an entire area.”

A health department report on the first six months of the new grading system, released this January, noted significant improvements between first and second inspections. While 73 percent of restaurants required a second inspection after failing to earn an “A” grade, nearly 44 percent of those initially scoring in the “B” range earned an “A” on second inspection, and 72 percent of those who initially earned a “C” grade were bumped up to “A” or “B” status.

Even grades of “A” or “B” don’t necessarily guarantee cleanliness, according to city standards, which list infractions like improperly sanitized cooking utensils at a minimum of two points, presence of rodents at as low as five points, and failing to keep food at the right temperature to prevent growth of bacteria at a minimum of seven points.

Still, Binioris said that the restaurant inspections are just a snapshot in time and don’t necessarily reflect restaurant’s continuing efforts to improve sanitation.

“We do our best,” he said. “If there are things that need to improve, we will address them. It’s an ongoing thing.”

Either way, Jesse Eiseman, CC ’13, said he doesn’t usually pay attention to restaurant grades unless they’re “really bad.”

“I can’t imagine what grade my fridge would get,” he said.

Gina Lee and Constance Boozer contributed reporting.

chelsea.lo@columbiaspectator.com