FirstAlerts
Food Safety Inspections

Naty's Pizza in Chicago Failed Its Health Inspection

City health inspectors cited Naty's Pizza for temperature control and pest violations on August 14, 2026.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 19, 2026, 6:27 p.m. ET
, located at in , , Illinois, failed its health inspection on August 14, 2026. The establishment is categorized as . The city's public inspection database shows no later inspection of this establishment, though it may have been re-inspected since without the database being updated. According to the city public health inspection report, inspectors observed cold foods held at improper temperatures ranging between 55.0 and 66.0 degrees Fahrenheit. Specific items included butter at 64.2F, cheese at 55.0-55.6F, tzatziki sauce at 66.0F, shredded lettuce at 58.6F, sliced tomatoes at 62.2F, lamb at 59.5F, and a pizza puff containing pork at 55.2F. A manager voluntarily discarded and denatured eight pounds of food valued at $100 on site. Inspectors also documented pest activity, observing over 20 mouse droppings on basement pallets, three large live flies in the first-floor prep area, and approximately 30 small live flies in the dining room and throughout the first-floor prep area. Outer openings were reported at the lower right side of the front entrance and the rear exit door. Additional observations included damaged gaskets on cold storage doors, wet towels underneath a condenser fan, a leaking drainpipe on a basement three-compartment sink, grease buildup and ground debris around an outside grease container, a wet mop drying in a sink, peeling material on a front prep hood, and a dimly lit dishwashing area in the basement.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 119 Aug 2026, 22:27current

    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.