Business Owners Question Pottsville’s Proposed Health Code Fines

President Ronald Reagan famously said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help’.”

Several Pottsville business owners heard another version of that classic Reagan one-liner on Monday when the City’s Health Officer said he created a controversial proposed ordinance that imposes a series of fines on food and drink businesses that violate health codes as a way of doing them a favor.

The ordinance underwent its official first reading on Monday and some business owners voiced their displeasure with it, specifically the vague and threatening nature of its wording. (For more on this ordinance, read: Proposed Pottsville Ordinance Could Levy Huge Fines on Violating Businesses)

Pottsville Health Officer: “I’m trying to make everybody’s life a little bit easier.”

“This is a little shocking to see these changes to our health licensing,” Bobby Weaver Jr. said.

Weaver and the city have been at loggerheads for more than a year on another matter but on Monday, they were able to have a rather civil discourse on this new proposed ordinance.

“There are some totally fine elements to it but a lot of them don’t seem to make a lot of sense. I haven’t had anybody that’s ever heard of a city implementing individual fines ranging up to $1,000 for health code violations. It’s not done. This would be the first.

“I strongly urge you guys to reconsider this path, because the more you read it, the more incredibly strange it gets,” he said.

City Health Code Officer Andrew VanArsdale explained that the language in Pottsville’s ordinance would be completely understood by anyone who is ServSafe certified.

He also said he crafted the ordinance as a sort of favor to restaurant and bar owners in Pottsville.

“I’m just trying to take what is a high-tier state offense and bring it down to the local level. So, it’s literally doing you guys a favor that we don’t have to get tied up in litigation,” VanArsdale said. “That’s literally all I’m trying to do. I’m trying to make everybody’s life a little bit easier.”

He defended the proposed ordinance further by saying it’s a more efficient way of dealing with health code violations with businesses in the city. VanArsdale said he’s already shut down four businesses in Pottsville within his first year on the job.

“If we can handle everything in-house and get it taken care of within a week versus three months, I think that’s the way to do it,” VanArsdale said.

So, how is this helping business owners?

Outside of the vague and missing wording from the proposed ordinance, the parts where it gets specific is another area of concern.

Weaver said he wasn’t sure why the City wanted to implement specific fines for health code violations when state-level rules already regulate these areas.

The City says by implementing this ordinance which levies smaller penalties for individual infractions, it can avoid taking every appeal of a fine to a court. However, the ordinance, as written, makes no mention of any appeals process.

“He (VanArsdale) has the power to strip away licenses. The PA Health Code is strong as-is and handles these regulations well with clear definitions. I personally don’t understand why the City is using fines,” Weaver said.

Councilman Mark Atkinson replied, “Because we could shut you down and then you’re closed until you get the Magistrate hearing. This is what this is intended to avoid.”

Weaver said, “I would recommend cleaning up some of the language, being clear on the structure and trying to figure out both a warning system that’s in this ordinance and some sort of appeals process before we put this into law. This needs to be tightened up because it feels anti-business.”

VanArsdale then further explained that without this proposed ordinance going into law in Pottsville, he currently has the power to simply shut down a restaurant and force business owners to go through “state litigation” to resolve the issues legally.

He said this ordinance is basically an end-around of that.

“As this is, we’ll handle it in-house,” he said. “I’d much rather it go that way.”

Vaguely written, needs to be reviewed

One of the biggest issues mentioned during a lengthy back-and-forth between Weaver and City officials was the vague – and sometimes missing – wording from the proposed ordinance.

For instance, VanArsdale said Monday that these new rules are really meant for “habitual offenders” of the city’s health codes. But that’s not mentioned anywhere in the verbiage of the ordinance.

“That should be in this ordinance. As this reads, there is no warning period. It doesn’t even bring up discretion of the code officer,” Weaver said. “What you just said is not in this ordinance. And that is concerning when interpretation is important.”

City officials seemed to mostly appreciate Weaver’s dissection of the proposed ordinance and the numerous questions he had on it.

Councilwoman Dorothy Botto said that’s why it’s presented as a first reading and isn’t voted on immediately.

“Getting the information out and getting you here … ” Mayor Dave Clews said, ” … other restaurant owners, to say, ‘Hey, this is a little stiff.’ We want to be business-friendly. But we also want to be able address situations when we need to with some teeth. I understand where you’re coming from.”

Who will review the ordinance before it’s passed?

Jason Bower, owner of Bowers Donuts Inc., questioned whether the City will have this proposed ordinance reviewed by a state-certified board before it’s put into law. He said he wants to ensure the laws are “accurate and enforceable.”

Clews told Bower that the ordinance would be reviewed by the City’s Solicitor.

But Bower again asked if it would also be reviewed by a “state-certified board.”

VanArsdale said that in addition to being ServSafe-certified, he was trained by the state and that “all the language” in the ordinance, as it’s currently written, is “pulled straight from the state.

Weaver then questioned that. He said if the City is truly trying to help business owners by enacting this ordinance, why weren’t they consulted prior to Monday’s first reading of it.

“You actually have to talk to people to make that true before just adding stuff to the first reading,” he said.

City Administrator Tom Palamar said that Weaver needs to consider the feasibility of what he’s saying. He said that if the City reached out to everyone before writing up ordinances, nothing would ever get passed.

Subscribe to Coal Region Canary

Get email updates from Coal Region Canary by becoming a subscriber today. Just enter your email address below to get started!

Support Coal Region Canary

Like our reporting and want to support truly local news in Schuylkill County? Your small donations help. For as little as $5, your contribution will allow us to cover more news that directly affects you. Consider donating today by hitting the big yellow button below ...