The Patriot News
Monday, November 28, 2005

It's great that the state plans to put the results of restaurant in spections online by the first of the year, but that only addresses part of a much larger problem.

The laws involving health inspections are antiquated and the combined state-local inspection system uneven. Something must be done. Having nearly 23 percent of licenses renewed without inspections, and some known violators remaining open is a public health crisis waiting to happen.

Those were among the findings of a study by the state auditor general's office prompted by a hepatitis A outbreak at a western Pennsylvania restaurant in 2003. In addition to finding that 4,000 of the state's 17,597 restaurants, clubs, bars and retail stores got relicensed despite not being inspected in two years, the report also found that inspectors rarely sought fines and did not suspend or revoke any licenses during the two-year period; useful information about unsanitary eating places was not readily available to the public; and there is poor coordination among the state Agriculture Department, which has oversight, and the 206 municipalities that do their own inspections.

Online availability is aimed at getting violators known to the public, and agriculture officials say they are already hard at work at reducing the backlog of inspections. The obvious answer is to hire more inspectors, and while that should be given strong consideration, it's not easy to find the money in these tight fiscal times.

But the situation can be attacked on two other fronts immediately -- legislation and better efficiency in the system.

The Legislature should overhaul what some in the restaurant business claim are outdated laws and ones with little teeth. They note that many fines haven't been adjusted in 60 years and some fines are still as low as $10.

The state also has to be more hands on in overseeing the maze of municipalities that do their own inspections. Uniform standards would be a start since local inspectors are only required to enforce the state's minimum code.

Then, the state and municipalities should look at areas where a regional approach might work. In the Harrisburg area, for example, the city is planning to have its inspectors post results online, but in neighboring Swatara Twp., officials say they don't have the money or time.

Wouldn't it seem likely that combining resources in Harrisburg and other urban areas would lower overhead and administrative costs, as well as give inspectors one set of regulations to follow?

Although money for more inspectors will have to be addressed at some point, it would seem prudent to at least streamline the system and have everyone play by the same modernized rule book.