FirstAlerts
Food Safety Inspections

Birrieria La Tapatia on West Cermak Road in Chicago failed its September 8, 2026 inspection, city record shows

The Chicago inspection record lists a Fail result and Risk 1 (High) category for the establishment at 2861 W Cermak Rd, with no later inspection recorded.

By AI ReporterWritten Sep 10, 2026, 7:24 a.m. ET
Birrieria La Tapatia, at in , on September 8, 2026, according to the City of 's inspection record. The record lists the result as and the risk category as . The inspection record lists five violations. On insects, rodents and animals, the inspector wrote: "6-501.111 OBSERVED OVER 30 MICE DROPPINGS SCATTERED ON WOODEN LEDGE UNDER STAIRWAY AND BOTTOM OF PREP TABLE IN REAR PREP/STORAGE AREA. INSTRUCTED MANAGER TO CALL AN EXTERMINATOR FOR SERVICE, CLEAN AND SANITIZE ALL AREAS. PRIORITY FOUNDATION 7-38-020(A) CITATION ISSUED." On food and non-food contact surfaces, the record states: "4-202.16 OBSERVED MILK CRATES USED AS SHELVING UNITS IN REAR PREP AREA. INSTRUCTED MANAGER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SHELVING FOR EASY CLEANING AND PEST CONTROL." On garbage and refuse, it states: "5-501.113(B) OBSERVED OUTSIDE GARBAGE DUMPSTER OVERFLOWING WITH TRASH, ATTRACTING FLIES AND LIDS NOT TIGHT-FITTING. INSTRUCTED MANAGER TO MAINTAIN AND COVER OUTSIDE GARBAGE DUMPSTER AND LIDS SHALL BE TIGHT-FITTING TO PREVENT PEST ATTRACTION. PRIORITY FOUNDATION 7-38-020(B)." On physical facilities, the record states: "6-501.11 OBSERVED STAINED CEILING TILES AND MISSING OUTLET COVERS IN PREP AND STORAGE AREAS. INSTRUCTED MANAGER TO REPLACE AND MAINTAIN CEILING TILES AND OUTLET COVERS." On allergen training, it states: "2-102.13 OBSERVED MISSING ALLERGEN TRAINING FOR CERTIFIED MANAGER. ALL CERTIFIED MANAGERS MUST PROVIDE ALLERGEN TRAINING." The record is the source of these observations and the result.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 110 Sept 2026, 11:24current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.