Kappo is refusing to install a sneeze guard that DBPR is requiring them to install, going so far as to say they will shut their restaurant down before installing one.
The owners feel there's a disconnect between them and DBPR, so much so they are no longer on speaking terms. Kappo has engaged a lawyer to handle all communication with the state agency.
They did not use a lawyer, however, when speaking with Fox35 and us Thursday afternoon in their seven-seat restaurant inside East End Market.
They feel the inspector is not familiar with the food they present and the method in which it's presented. They want the DBPR to work with them on creating new rules for their type of restaurant, but the inspector told them in his 20 years of employment, he's never seen that happen.
They feel the inspector is not familiar with the food they present and the method in which it's presented. They want the DBPR to work with them on creating new rules for their type of restaurant, but the inspector told them in his 20 years of employment, he's never seen that happen.
The DBPR told us "The division routinely works with licensees to achieve compliance on issues related to sanitation and safety."
So the inspector was wrong.
However, there does appear to be a disconnect between what the restaurant is and how the DBPR wishes to classify it.
For example, on the 7/7/15 inspection, DBPR classified Kappo as a "self-service salad bar/buffet." It is neither. The chef is behind the counter and the chef hands the food to the customer. Heres why says they classify Kappo in this manner:
So couldn't they potentially present a design to DBPR that potentially meets DBPR's requirements as well as allow the passage of food from the Chef to the guest and allow Chef and guest communication?
For example, on the 7/7/15 inspection, DBPR classified Kappo as a "self-service salad bar/buffet." It is neither. The chef is behind the counter and the chef hands the food to the customer. Heres why says they classify Kappo in this manner:
The Division of Hotels and Restaurants adopts the safety and sanitation standards outlined in the FDA Food Code to uphold and protect public health and safety. As outlined in code, during preparation, unpackaged food shall be protected from environmental sources of contamination, which includes effectively blocking the direct line from the customer’s mouth to exposed ready-to-eat food, typically through the use of a sneeze guard.
What the what?
As stated, the owners are adamantly against adding a sneeze guard. They feel it does not make sense. They also state, more importantly, that they will shut down their restaurant if they are forced to add a sneeze guard.
But before they shut it down and exit their lease, potentially incurring a financial penalty from the landlords, what exactly would the sneeze guard have to look like? The answer is surprising. When we asked the DBPR the exact dimensions (height, width, materials) the sneeze guard needs to be, we found out... there are no rules for this. There is no size, installation or material requirement for sneeze guards per the DBPR.
Establishments may use any effective means to protect exposed ready-to-eat food from contamination without interrupting the desired dining experience.
So couldn't they potentially present a design to DBPR that potentially meets DBPR's requirements as well as allow the passage of food from the Chef to the guest and allow Chef and guest communication?
Yes.
The sticking point for DBPR really then is not the sneeze guard. It's that unpackaged food needs to be effectively protected from environmental sources of contamination during preparation. During the January 22, 2015 inspection, DBPR found that displayed food was not properly protected from contamination. "While the items are being rolled into sushi they are not protected from customer contamination."
Why, then, can Hibache-style restaurants do what they do without a sneeze guard?
Hibachi-style restaurants' food is not stored in the area in which it is cooked. This is why Hibachi-style restaurants don't require a sneeze guard. That, and the fact that they serve heat-treated food, meaning the food has undergone a kill step prior to serving.
So if they stored their food in any area but the area in which it is cooked, perhaps a sneeze guard won't be needed.
We asked DBPR if this were possible and they said "DBPR’s Division of Hotels and Restaurants would be willing to work with the operator to find an adequate solution to this situation."
Then there's the petition to the City of Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer asking him to help Kappo. This doesn't quite make sense because DBPR is State of Florida. What can a City Mayor do with State regulations? Regardless, we asked DBPR if this petition could change the sneeze guard requirement.
The short answer is no.
"Per your inquiry, the Division of Hotels and Restaurants is a state agency responsible for enforcing Florida Statutes as implemented by the Florida Legislature."
When speaking with the owner of Kappo, Lordferr Lalicon, we also learned that he questioned DBPR (through his lawyer) as to why Brazilian steakhouses, places where waiters carry cooked meat on sticks, slicing off bits for guests at their table, aren't required to have sneeze guards. He said his lawyer said DBPR said that the food is being monitored by the waiters through a variance.
Kappo says they are monitoring their food as well and they, too, would like a variance.
The owners don't like that the sneeze guard specs aren't defined, and Lalicon says if the inspector had presented specific requirements, he would have been more receptive.
All three owners feel new rules for restaurants like theirs need to be created. The owners have seen Michelin rated restaurants in other cities execute this'd type of serving, and he wants DBPR to be aware of it and reconsider their stance.
Both sides are unwilling to bend. The owners would like DBPR to work with them, but claim DBPR refuses. And at the same time, Kappo will shut it's doors if it doesn't get its way.
At Kobe Japanese Steakhouse & Sushi Bar, food is prepared in front of guests without a sneeze guard. (Photo Credit)
This sneeze guard is hardly protecting anyone. Photo Credit