9 restaurants fail Pima County health inspections in September
- Updated
Most passed follow-ups; August and July inspections also included.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
History:ÌýSince 2014, this location has had a mixed record, with two good ratings, one excellent rating, a needs improvement and the most recent probationary rating, followed by two failed follow-ups.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEleven priority violations, including a hand sink with no paper towels, employees drying hands with rags, using a food prep sink for dishwashing, improper preparation of sanitizer that resulted in elevated levels of chlorine, inadequate food cooling, and unclear date marking.
Follow-up:ÌýFailed two follow-up inspections and then passed on Oct. 5.
Response:Ìý“Everything is good now,†said manager Esmerelda Gonzalez, who added that she disciplined several employees who had not been following restaurant policies.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýHistory: Since 2002, the location has almost exclusively received ratings of good and excellent.
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, earning the restaurant a “probationary†rating. The violations included inadequate hand-washing practices, insufficient washing of utensils, a container labeled “sanitizer†containing no approved sanitizing liquid, food kept at unsafe temperatures, improper labeling of liquids and inaccurate thermometers.
Follow-up:ÌýFailed one follow-up and passed on Sept. 26.
Response:Ìý“We corrected all the violations that we had,†said owner Tony Nguyen, who added that he had replaced a refrigerator in response to the failed inspection.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2014, the restaurant has received only ratings of good and excellent. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSix priority violations on Sept. 15, earning the restaurant a “probationary†rating. Those included inadequate hand-washing practices, a hand-washing sink with no soap or paper towels, and foods kept at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed its first follow-up inspection on Sept. 26.
Response:ÌýA message left seeking comment wasn’t returned by deadline.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2000 the restaurant has received ratings of good and excellent almost exclusively, though it did receive one needs improvement rating in 2010. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEleven priority violations, which earned the restaurant a “probationary†rating. These included a hand-washing sink with no paper towels; hamburgers contacting a cutting board that was not being cleaned frequently enough; elevated levels of chlorine in sanitizing solution; wings kept at unsafe temperatures; and unlabeled spray bottles.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed its first follow-up inspection on Oct. 5.
Response:ÌýOwner J.J. EsquibelÌýsaid all the issues raised were fixed before the follow-up inspection. He described the first failed inspection as a “teachable moment.â€
“Moving forward it will definitely help us to improve what we’re doing,†he added.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2012, the restaurant has received mostly good ratings and a handful of excellent ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSix priority violations, including unsafe food and dish handling, hand-washing sinks blocked and not stocked with paper towels, food kept at unsafe temperatures, no consumer warning in the menu regarding undercooked foods, and prohibited pest-control substances.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed its first follow-up inspection on Oct. 3.
Response:ÌýA message left seeking comment wasn’t returned by deadline.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýThis was the restaurant’s first routine inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight priority violations, including inadequate hand-washing practices, a hand-washing sink blocked by a stack of cases, improper food handling, yogurt past its expiration date by as many as 13 days, unmarked spray bottles, and unsafe storage of toxic chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýThere was no indication in county records that a follow-up inspection has yet been conducted.
Response:ÌýThe phone number listed in the inspection report and online was not in service.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýThe restaurant has failed both of its routine inspections since opening in May.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSix priority violations, including a hand-washing sink filled with trash and ingredients, the use of hand sink water to cook rice, failing to use sanitizer to clean cooking equipment, and food kept at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up:ÌýNo indication in county records that a follow-up inspection has yet been conducted.
Response:ÌýA message seeking comment wasn’t returned by deadline. Commenting on the restaurant’s failed June inspection, manager Jenny Lu previously told the Star that those violations were corrected and that the inspector “sat down with me personally, and he taught me how to do everything.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2007, the restaurant has received exclusively good and excellent ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight priority violations, earning it a “probationary†rating. These included inadequate hand-washing, an inaccessible hand-washing sink, uncooked meat stored near ready-to-eat food, knives encrusted with food debris, food stored at unsafe temperatures, and improper storage of toxic chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed a follow-up inspection on Oct. 5.
Response:ÌýRestaurant owners were said to be unavailable for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In September
ÌýMobile food truck
History:ÌýThis was the food truck’s first routine inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýAt least 11 priority violations, and possibly a few more, on Sept. 23. These included the person-in-charge’s lack of food safety knowledge, preparation of food without washing hands, an unstocked hand-washing station, use of “slimy†and seemingly rotten fish, raw meat stored near other foods, improper dishwashing techniques, food stored at unsafe temperatures, and no source of running water at the food truck.
Follow-up:ÌýNo indication in county records that a follow-up inspection has yet been conducted.
Response:ÌýNo phone number was listed in the inspection report and no number could be found online for the food truck.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
September health inspections:
4,600
Food service licenses in Pima County
652Ìý
Excellent and good inspections
14
Needs improvement inspections
15
Probationary and failed inspectionsÌý
Source: Pima County Health DepartmentÌý
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Received mostly “good†and “excellent†ratings since 2002. Had one previous “needs improvement†rating in 2014 and this was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýPriority violations including raw meat stored over vegetables, washing of utensils with no soap or sanitizer, inadequate cooling of food, inaccurate food dating, no food thermometers on site, and rodent droppings near the water heater.
Follow-up: Hasn't yet occurred.
Response: Owner Wayne Wei said he didn’t feel his restaurant should have failed the inspection. “We did the right thing,†he said, adding later: “Sometimes we have these inspectors come over and just tell what we need to correct on site. This time they did not.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Since opening in 2014, has received only “excellent†ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw: The restaurant was ordered closed on Aug. 2 because sewage was backing up in the dishwasher area. The inspector also noted problems with hand washing sinks and employee hand-washing practices. On a follow-up inspection, an inspector also noted that many utensils were not clean “to sight and touch†and some foods were not stored at sufficiently cool temperatures.
Follow-up: Failed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 5, but passed on Aug. 10.
Response: Problems with the sewage may have been due to a disgruntled employee, manager David Worth said. A cleanup revealed that a pair of gloves and bar rag had been stuffed into a drain in a way that seemed to be intentional. Worth said he suspected the same employee also did damage to a bathroom sink and hand-washing station. Worth said the former employee's last words before leaving the restaurant were, "Well, you haven’t heard the last of me."
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Since 2014, has received only “good†and “excellent†ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw: Fourteen priority violations, a high number. They included not sanitizing dishes, employee food stored in refrigerator, improper food handling practices, raw seafood stored above ready-to-eat food, food kept at unsafe temperatures, inadequate food labeling, cleaning products stored near food, “three live roaches each in different life stages†in food prep areas, and “crudely constructed cheese cutter made from a wire and two cardboard handles.â€
Follow-up: The restaurant failed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 25.
Response: Manager Brenda Rodriguez said her staff was taking a number of measures to make sure the restaurant passes the next inspection.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Has had three previous “probationary†ratings, as well as a “needs improvement rating,†but has otherwise received ratings of “good†and “excellent.â€
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, including dirty cutting boards, undated food in the refrigerator, and insect spray and skin cream stored near food prep areas. There were no devices to prevent backflow of contaminants through water lines in the dish-cleaning area and an industrial drill was being used to mix salsa.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 22.
Response: General manager Wayne Hallquist said everything had been corrected.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Since 2014, has received only “good†and “excellent†ratings. This was its first fail. (Another Molinito location also failed an inspection in August; see above.)
What the inspector saw: Five priority violations on Aug. 16, including improper dishwashing and food handling practices, a hand sink with no soap, and food stored at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up: Passed an Aug. 26 reinspection.
Response: General manager Wayne Hallquist said all the issues have been resolved.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Since 2009, has received exclusively “good†and “excellent†ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, including a soapless hand-washing station, an employee washing hands in a prep sink, dishes and utensils stored with dried food, inadequate food cooling practices, and a dirty ice scoop.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 29.
Response: The restaurant did not respond to request for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Has never before failed an inspection, and has received “good†and “excellent†ratings exclusively since 2003.
What the inspector saw: The restaurant’s make unit was not cooling foods adequately. There was no certified food protection manager on site. The two violations earned the restaurant a “needs improvement†rating, which is less serious than a “probationary†rating.
Follow-up: Failed its first follow-up on Aug. 12, but passed four days later.
Response: Owner Chung Kim said the make unit in question was new and not working properly at first. Staff were eventually able to get it keep food adequately cool.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: This appears to have been the restaurant’s first regular inspection.
What the inspector saw: Eleven priority violations, including a hand sink being used as a dump sink, a hand sink not being stocked with soap, raw meats stored above ready-to-eat foods, and foods kept at inappropriate temperatures. Some of the violations were corrected on-site.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 29.
Response: The restaurant did not respond to requests for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Since 2000, has received largely “good†and “excellent†ratings, but has had a string of provisionals over the last year.
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, earning the restaurant a “probationary†rating. Among those violations were raw meat stored above produce, inadequately covered food, food prep tools covered in food debris, and food kept at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Sept. 1.
Response: The restaurant did not respond to requests for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Since 2000, ratings of “excellent†and “good†almost exclusively.
What the inspector saw: The market got a “needs improvement†rating in late July, and failed a follow-inspection in early August. The violations found in July included no hand-washing sink available for employees bagging jerky and a dishwashing sink connected directly to the sewer line.
Follow-up: Failed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 1, but passed a week later.
Response: The phone number listed does not work.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In August
History: Has never gotten a more serious “probationary†rating, but has gotten several “needs improvement†ratings and failed followup inspections. Since 2000, it has received mostly “excellent†and “good†ratings.
What the inspector saw: A series of failed August inspections stems from a June inspection where health department staff discovered that a three-bin sink was “directly plumbed to the sewer,†which is not allowed for sinks used to hold food equipment or utensils.
Follow-up: The market failed three follow-up inspections in August.
Response: Owner Tun Lee said the sink is not being used, and he is looking for a plumber to carry out necessary repairs.
- Updated
4,600: Food service licenses in Pima County
496: Excellent, good or passed inspections in August
21: Needs improvement inspections in August
11: Failed or probationary inspections in August
Source: Pima County Health Department
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In July:
History:ÌýThe restaurant has had exclusively received "good" and "excellent" ratings since its opening in 2008. These were its first failed inspections.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight foodborne illness risk factors earned the location a probationary rating. Those violations included a manager on site without “knowledge of foodborne disease prevention,†employee drinks stored above food, trays blocking hand-washing stations, raw eggs sitting on top of cooked pork, walk-in shelves “heavily encrusted with food debris,†unsafe food temperatures, and food stored without adequate date marking. Most were corrected on site.
Follow-up:ÌýThe restaurant failed a July 11 follow-up, but passed another on July 21.
Response:ÌýMessages left with a manager were not returned.Ìý
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýThis location has had exclusively "good" and "excellent" ratings since opening in 2000.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSeven risk factors, which earned the location a probationary rating. Among them were a manager who did not take initiative to correct problems, poor hand-washing and food handling practices, an obstructed hand-washing station, inadequately cleaned equipment including “grossly unsanitary†cutting boards, unsafe food storage temperatures and inadequately labeled chemicals. Several were addressed during the inspection.
Follow-up:ÌýThe restaurant passed a July 18 follow-up inspection.
Response:ÌýIn a written response, operations manager Scott Seather said, “We were surprised and disappointed to hear that one of our ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ Village Inn restaurants … failed a recent health inspection. When we heard the news, we immediately took action and investigated the situation. Village Inn promptly passed a health re-inspection, and will continue to make our guests’ and employees’ safety the number one priority.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2002, the restaurant has received "good" and "excellent" ratings exclusively. These were its first failed inspections.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight risk factors, earning the restaurant a probationary rating. These included obstructed hand-washing sinks, eggs stored above ready-to-eat foods, improper food handling practices, inadequate food cooling practices, no customer disclosure about the risks of undercooked foods, and unlabeled cleaning chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýThe location failed an Aug. 1 follow-up inspection.
Response:ÌýErnest Aguirre, the restaurant’s owner, said most of the violations were corrected between the two inspections, and he expects to pass the second follow-up. “I think we should be passing the inspection,†he said. “I’ve been checking the temperatures and everything is good.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýOther than one other "needs improvement" rating, the restaurant has received exclusively "good" and "excellent" ratings.
What the inspector saw:ÌýA handful of violations during a July 19 inspection, earning it a "needs improvement" rating, which is not as serious as a fail but still prompts a follow-up inspection. Among the violations were an obstructed hand-washing station, unsafe food temperatures, and the use of unapproved pest control chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýThe restaurant failed its first reinspection on July 20, but passed the next day.
Response:ÌýOwner Sung Ho Kang said, “It’s not going to happen again.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
- Updated
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýRecords of previous inspections are not available on the health department's website, but co-owner Ramiro Flores said the restaurant has been open since 2013 and passed all previous inspections.Ìý
What the inspector saw:ÌýNine risk factors on July 25, earning the restaurant a probationary rating. The violations included a manager who did not “demonstrate adequate food safety knowledge†and noted to the inspector that they use Google to look up requirements; no procedures in place for “vomiting or diarrheal†events; inadequate hand-washing and food handling practices; raw bacon stored above ready-to-eat foods; food held at unsafe temperatures; and no disclosure of undercooked food hazards on its menu. Several were corrected on site.
Follow-up:ÌýFlores said the restaurant was reinspected Friday and passed, though documentation of the follow-up was not immediately available on the county's website.Ìý
Response:ÌýFlores said the restaurant has taken a number of measures since the inspection, including purchasing new cooling equipment, signing employees up for training, and putting food safety and hand-washing signs up for workers. "We just wanted to make it as easy as possible for our cooks to comply and have the knowledge," he said.Ìý
- Updated
4,600:ÌýFood service licenses in Pima County
527:ÌýExcellent, good or passed inspections in July
16:ÌýNeeds improvement inspections in July
7:ÌýFailed or probationary inspections in July Ìý
Source: Pima County Health Department
More like this...
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
History:ÌýSince 2014, this location has had a mixed record, with two good ratings, one excellent rating, a needs improvement and the most recent probationary rating, followed by two failed follow-ups.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEleven priority violations, including a hand sink with no paper towels, employees drying hands with rags, using a food prep sink for dishwashing, improper preparation of sanitizer that resulted in elevated levels of chlorine, inadequate food cooling, and unclear date marking.
Follow-up:ÌýFailed two follow-up inspections and then passed on Oct. 5.
Response:Ìý“Everything is good now,†said manager Esmerelda Gonzalez, who added that she disciplined several employees who had not been following restaurant policies.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýHistory: Since 2002, the location has almost exclusively received ratings of good and excellent.
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, earning the restaurant a “probationary†rating. The violations included inadequate hand-washing practices, insufficient washing of utensils, a container labeled “sanitizer†containing no approved sanitizing liquid, food kept at unsafe temperatures, improper labeling of liquids and inaccurate thermometers.
Follow-up:ÌýFailed one follow-up and passed on Sept. 26.
Response:Ìý“We corrected all the violations that we had,†said owner Tony Nguyen, who added that he had replaced a refrigerator in response to the failed inspection.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2014, the restaurant has received only ratings of good and excellent. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSix priority violations on Sept. 15, earning the restaurant a “probationary†rating. Those included inadequate hand-washing practices, a hand-washing sink with no soap or paper towels, and foods kept at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed its first follow-up inspection on Sept. 26.
Response:ÌýA message left seeking comment wasn’t returned by deadline.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2000 the restaurant has received ratings of good and excellent almost exclusively, though it did receive one needs improvement rating in 2010. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEleven priority violations, which earned the restaurant a “probationary†rating. These included a hand-washing sink with no paper towels; hamburgers contacting a cutting board that was not being cleaned frequently enough; elevated levels of chlorine in sanitizing solution; wings kept at unsafe temperatures; and unlabeled spray bottles.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed its first follow-up inspection on Oct. 5.
Response:ÌýOwner J.J. EsquibelÌýsaid all the issues raised were fixed before the follow-up inspection. He described the first failed inspection as a “teachable moment.â€
“Moving forward it will definitely help us to improve what we’re doing,†he added.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2012, the restaurant has received mostly good ratings and a handful of excellent ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSix priority violations, including unsafe food and dish handling, hand-washing sinks blocked and not stocked with paper towels, food kept at unsafe temperatures, no consumer warning in the menu regarding undercooked foods, and prohibited pest-control substances.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed its first follow-up inspection on Oct. 3.
Response:ÌýA message left seeking comment wasn’t returned by deadline.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýThis was the restaurant’s first routine inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight priority violations, including inadequate hand-washing practices, a hand-washing sink blocked by a stack of cases, improper food handling, yogurt past its expiration date by as many as 13 days, unmarked spray bottles, and unsafe storage of toxic chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýThere was no indication in county records that a follow-up inspection has yet been conducted.
Response:ÌýThe phone number listed in the inspection report and online was not in service.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýThe restaurant has failed both of its routine inspections since opening in May.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSix priority violations, including a hand-washing sink filled with trash and ingredients, the use of hand sink water to cook rice, failing to use sanitizer to clean cooking equipment, and food kept at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up:ÌýNo indication in county records that a follow-up inspection has yet been conducted.
Response:ÌýA message seeking comment wasn’t returned by deadline. Commenting on the restaurant’s failed June inspection, manager Jenny Lu previously told the Star that those violations were corrected and that the inspector “sat down with me personally, and he taught me how to do everything.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2007, the restaurant has received exclusively good and excellent ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight priority violations, earning it a “probationary†rating. These included inadequate hand-washing, an inaccessible hand-washing sink, uncooked meat stored near ready-to-eat food, knives encrusted with food debris, food stored at unsafe temperatures, and improper storage of toxic chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýPassed a follow-up inspection on Oct. 5.
Response:ÌýRestaurant owners were said to be unavailable for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In September
ÌýMobile food truck
History:ÌýThis was the food truck’s first routine inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýAt least 11 priority violations, and possibly a few more, on Sept. 23. These included the person-in-charge’s lack of food safety knowledge, preparation of food without washing hands, an unstocked hand-washing station, use of “slimy†and seemingly rotten fish, raw meat stored near other foods, improper dishwashing techniques, food stored at unsafe temperatures, and no source of running water at the food truck.
Follow-up:ÌýNo indication in county records that a follow-up inspection has yet been conducted.
Response:ÌýNo phone number was listed in the inspection report and no number could be found online for the food truck.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
September health inspections:
4,600
Food service licenses in Pima County
652Ìý
Excellent and good inspections
14
Needs improvement inspections
15
Probationary and failed inspectionsÌý
Source: Pima County Health DepartmentÌý
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Received mostly “good†and “excellent†ratings since 2002. Had one previous “needs improvement†rating in 2014 and this was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw:ÌýPriority violations including raw meat stored over vegetables, washing of utensils with no soap or sanitizer, inadequate cooling of food, inaccurate food dating, no food thermometers on site, and rodent droppings near the water heater.
Follow-up: Hasn't yet occurred.
Response: Owner Wayne Wei said he didn’t feel his restaurant should have failed the inspection. “We did the right thing,†he said, adding later: “Sometimes we have these inspectors come over and just tell what we need to correct on site. This time they did not.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Since opening in 2014, has received only “excellent†ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw: The restaurant was ordered closed on Aug. 2 because sewage was backing up in the dishwasher area. The inspector also noted problems with hand washing sinks and employee hand-washing practices. On a follow-up inspection, an inspector also noted that many utensils were not clean “to sight and touch†and some foods were not stored at sufficiently cool temperatures.
Follow-up: Failed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 5, but passed on Aug. 10.
Response: Problems with the sewage may have been due to a disgruntled employee, manager David Worth said. A cleanup revealed that a pair of gloves and bar rag had been stuffed into a drain in a way that seemed to be intentional. Worth said he suspected the same employee also did damage to a bathroom sink and hand-washing station. Worth said the former employee's last words before leaving the restaurant were, "Well, you haven’t heard the last of me."
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Since 2014, has received only “good†and “excellent†ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw: Fourteen priority violations, a high number. They included not sanitizing dishes, employee food stored in refrigerator, improper food handling practices, raw seafood stored above ready-to-eat food, food kept at unsafe temperatures, inadequate food labeling, cleaning products stored near food, “three live roaches each in different life stages†in food prep areas, and “crudely constructed cheese cutter made from a wire and two cardboard handles.â€
Follow-up: The restaurant failed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 25.
Response: Manager Brenda Rodriguez said her staff was taking a number of measures to make sure the restaurant passes the next inspection.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Has had three previous “probationary†ratings, as well as a “needs improvement rating,†but has otherwise received ratings of “good†and “excellent.â€
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, including dirty cutting boards, undated food in the refrigerator, and insect spray and skin cream stored near food prep areas. There were no devices to prevent backflow of contaminants through water lines in the dish-cleaning area and an industrial drill was being used to mix salsa.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 22.
Response: General manager Wayne Hallquist said everything had been corrected.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Since 2014, has received only “good†and “excellent†ratings. This was its first fail. (Another Molinito location also failed an inspection in August; see above.)
What the inspector saw: Five priority violations on Aug. 16, including improper dishwashing and food handling practices, a hand sink with no soap, and food stored at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up: Passed an Aug. 26 reinspection.
Response: General manager Wayne Hallquist said all the issues have been resolved.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Since 2009, has received exclusively “good†and “excellent†ratings. This was its first failed inspection.
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, including a soapless hand-washing station, an employee washing hands in a prep sink, dishes and utensils stored with dried food, inadequate food cooling practices, and a dirty ice scoop.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 29.
Response: The restaurant did not respond to request for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Has never before failed an inspection, and has received “good†and “excellent†ratings exclusively since 2003.
What the inspector saw: The restaurant’s make unit was not cooling foods adequately. There was no certified food protection manager on site. The two violations earned the restaurant a “needs improvement†rating, which is less serious than a “probationary†rating.
Follow-up: Failed its first follow-up on Aug. 12, but passed four days later.
Response: Owner Chung Kim said the make unit in question was new and not working properly at first. Staff were eventually able to get it keep food adequately cool.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: This appears to have been the restaurant’s first regular inspection.
What the inspector saw: Eleven priority violations, including a hand sink being used as a dump sink, a hand sink not being stocked with soap, raw meats stored above ready-to-eat foods, and foods kept at inappropriate temperatures. Some of the violations were corrected on-site.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 29.
Response: The restaurant did not respond to requests for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Since 2000, has received largely “good†and “excellent†ratings, but has had a string of provisionals over the last year.
What the inspector saw: Eight priority violations, earning the restaurant a “probationary†rating. Among those violations were raw meat stored above produce, inadequately covered food, food prep tools covered in food debris, and food kept at unsafe temperatures.
Follow-up: Passed a follow-up inspection on Sept. 1.
Response: The restaurant did not respond to requests for comment.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Since 2000, ratings of “excellent†and “good†almost exclusively.
What the inspector saw: The market got a “needs improvement†rating in late July, and failed a follow-inspection in early August. The violations found in July included no hand-washing sink available for employees bagging jerky and a dishwashing sink connected directly to the sewer line.
Follow-up: Failed a follow-up inspection on Aug. 1, but passed a week later.
Response: The phone number listed does not work.
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In August
History: Has never gotten a more serious “probationary†rating, but has gotten several “needs improvement†ratings and failed followup inspections. Since 2000, it has received mostly “excellent†and “good†ratings.
What the inspector saw: A series of failed August inspections stems from a June inspection where health department staff discovered that a three-bin sink was “directly plumbed to the sewer,†which is not allowed for sinks used to hold food equipment or utensils.
Follow-up: The market failed three follow-up inspections in August.
Response: Owner Tun Lee said the sink is not being used, and he is looking for a plumber to carry out necessary repairs.
4,600: Food service licenses in Pima County
496: Excellent, good or passed inspections in August
21: Needs improvement inspections in August
11: Failed or probationary inspections in August
Source: Pima County Health Department
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In July:
History:ÌýThe restaurant has had exclusively received "good" and "excellent" ratings since its opening in 2008. These were its first failed inspections.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight foodborne illness risk factors earned the location a probationary rating. Those violations included a manager on site without “knowledge of foodborne disease prevention,†employee drinks stored above food, trays blocking hand-washing stations, raw eggs sitting on top of cooked pork, walk-in shelves “heavily encrusted with food debris,†unsafe food temperatures, and food stored without adequate date marking. Most were corrected on site.
Follow-up:ÌýThe restaurant failed a July 11 follow-up, but passed another on July 21.
Response:ÌýMessages left with a manager were not returned.Ìý
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýThis location has had exclusively "good" and "excellent" ratings since opening in 2000.
What the inspector saw:ÌýSeven risk factors, which earned the location a probationary rating. Among them were a manager who did not take initiative to correct problems, poor hand-washing and food handling practices, an obstructed hand-washing station, inadequately cleaned equipment including “grossly unsanitary†cutting boards, unsafe food storage temperatures and inadequately labeled chemicals. Several were addressed during the inspection.
Follow-up:ÌýThe restaurant passed a July 18 follow-up inspection.
Response:ÌýIn a written response, operations manager Scott Seather said, “We were surprised and disappointed to hear that one of our ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ Village Inn restaurants … failed a recent health inspection. When we heard the news, we immediately took action and investigated the situation. Village Inn promptly passed a health re-inspection, and will continue to make our guests’ and employees’ safety the number one priority.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýSince 2002, the restaurant has received "good" and "excellent" ratings exclusively. These were its first failed inspections.
What the inspector saw:ÌýEight risk factors, earning the restaurant a probationary rating. These included obstructed hand-washing sinks, eggs stored above ready-to-eat foods, improper food handling practices, inadequate food cooling practices, no customer disclosure about the risks of undercooked foods, and unlabeled cleaning chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýThe location failed an Aug. 1 follow-up inspection.
Response:ÌýErnest Aguirre, the restaurant’s owner, said most of the violations were corrected between the two inspections, and he expects to pass the second follow-up. “I think we should be passing the inspection,†he said. “I’ve been checking the temperatures and everything is good.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýOther than one other "needs improvement" rating, the restaurant has received exclusively "good" and "excellent" ratings.
What the inspector saw:ÌýA handful of violations during a July 19 inspection, earning it a "needs improvement" rating, which is not as serious as a fail but still prompts a follow-up inspection. Among the violations were an obstructed hand-washing station, unsafe food temperatures, and the use of unapproved pest control chemicals.
Follow-up:ÌýThe restaurant failed its first reinspection on July 20, but passed the next day.
Response:ÌýOwner Sung Ho Kang said, “It’s not going to happen again.â€
- Murphy Woodhouse ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥
In July:
ÌýHistory:ÌýRecords of previous inspections are not available on the health department's website, but co-owner Ramiro Flores said the restaurant has been open since 2013 and passed all previous inspections.Ìý
What the inspector saw:ÌýNine risk factors on July 25, earning the restaurant a probationary rating. The violations included a manager who did not “demonstrate adequate food safety knowledge†and noted to the inspector that they use Google to look up requirements; no procedures in place for “vomiting or diarrheal†events; inadequate hand-washing and food handling practices; raw bacon stored above ready-to-eat foods; food held at unsafe temperatures; and no disclosure of undercooked food hazards on its menu. Several were corrected on site.
Follow-up:ÌýFlores said the restaurant was reinspected Friday and passed, though documentation of the follow-up was not immediately available on the county's website.Ìý
Response:ÌýFlores said the restaurant has taken a number of measures since the inspection, including purchasing new cooling equipment, signing employees up for training, and putting food safety and hand-washing signs up for workers. "We just wanted to make it as easy as possible for our cooks to comply and have the knowledge," he said.Ìý
4,600:ÌýFood service licenses in Pima County
527:ÌýExcellent, good or passed inspections in July
16:ÌýNeeds improvement inspections in July
7:ÌýFailed or probationary inspections in July Ìý
Source: Pima County Health Department
More like this...
Most Popular
-
Puerto Peñasco visitors will soon face tourist permit enforcement -
This popular ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ shopping center has a new owner
-
This chef grew up in his family's popular ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ restaurant. Now he's running a restaurant of his own.
-
Prop. 414: Voters soundly reject ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ sales tax increase
-
Quick fallout expected for ÃÛèÖÖ±²¥ from rejection of Prop. 414
