Restaurant Inspector Oversight Reform

Section two provides that all cities with a population of one million or more which employ health inspectors to oversee the compliance of restaurants and food establishments with local health regulations shall establish an independent oversight body to receive anonymous complaints about health inspectors. Furthermore, such independent oversight body must provide complaint intake through a hotline and website provided in the following languages: Arabic; Bengali; Chinese; French; Haitian-Creole; Korean; Russian; Spanish and Urdu. Such independent oversight body shall investigate any consistent reporting about health inspectors from restaurant owners or employees and shall refer such cases to the city's investigative agency to form an annual summary report, including the total amount of complaints, top type of complaints, and investigative findings.

Section three provides that all cities with a population of one million or more which employ health inspectors to oversee the compliance of restaurants and food establishments with local health regulations shall establish a process for restaurants and food establishments to refuse and reschedule an inspection up to three times by paying a fee to the agency employing the health inspector. The fees to be imposed shall be:

a. seventy-five dollars for a first-time rescheduling

b. one hundred fifty dollars for a second-time rescheduling

c. two hundred fifty dollars for a third-time rescheduling

Section four sets forth the effective date.

Justification

Small businesses made up 98% of all businesses in New York State according to the Empire State Development (ESD) Annual Report on the State of Small Businesses (August 2016). Among businesses which have less than 20 employees, the Accommodations and Food Service Industry ranked second-place for employment, and ranked the highest-employing industry among businesses which have 20-49 employees. It is crucial to maintain healthy economic regulations for small businesses, with nearly half of New York State's private-sector workforce employed by these industries.

However, we are seeing a combination of factors that have recently forced many of small businesses to shut down. Some of these factors include excessive-fining, harsh regulations, rent increase, and higher wages; all contributing to the closure of countless family-owned restaurants. In result, numerous media outlets are beginning to cover the hardships of restaurant owners and advocate for well-needed protections. The New York Times published the story of a New York City restaurant owner who will be shutting down the restaurant in May after 17 years of steady business. The closure is inevitable due to real estate taxes that have more than doubled in the past two years, as well as a lack of revenue to support rising minimum wage. Another Manhattan restaurant owner describes a similar story in a Daily Times article, as he mentions that he has had to triple the cost of a meal since his business first opened in the 1990's, and further explains that New York State and Municipal regulations bring outrageous paperwork requirements to mom-and-pop shops that are nearly impossible for non-chain restaurants to maintain. The NY Eater has covered over 300 similar stories since 2014 - a track record that indicates clear trends in the closure of NYC restaurants.

The Department of Health currently facilitates inspections of food establishments within set time periods (also known as cycles), but lacks the oversight needed to prevent food inspectors from abusing their powers. Many vulnerable small businesses and restaurant owners suffer from the current process; as food inspectors are not held accountable for inappropriate behavior, such as breaking the inspection schedule or unfairly grading restaurants by using improper grading assessment standards. Although restaurants and food establishments may regularly maintain a clean, organized and safe environment, unscrupulous inspectors have the ability to assign a poor assessment - out of mistake, bias or aggressive influence during the inspection. In such cases, these business owners endure long waiting periods to be reevaluated and have no way of filing a complaint against the inspector for inappropriate behavior or wrongful grading. In order to safeguard our small businesses from this kind of unjust discretion, an independent oversight body should be established to collect complaints against inspectors, and small business owners should also be able to reschedule their inspection with a new inspector up to three times by paying a fee to the inspector's agency.

Prior legislative history

This is a new bill.

Fiscal implications

None to the state.

Effective date

This act shall take effect immediately.