THE VILLAGES, FL. Back in February 2026, a state agriculture inspector walked into Fujisan Sushi, a seafood market retail operation in The Villages, and found an employee mixing acidified sushi rice with bare hands instead of a chopstick or spoon, in direct violation of the shop's own state-approved safety procedure.
That finding was the most serious of three violations cited during the February 4 inspection conducted by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
What Inspectors Found
The acidified rice violation was flagged as a priority citation. The inspector's notes read: "Food employee not following standard operating procedure for measuring pH meter of acidified rice. He did not follow the Procedure to mix the rice with chopstick or spoon, he used hands." The person in charge was present and corrected the procedure during the inspection, using a chopstick to mix the rice and water to produce a slurry for pH testing.
The second violation was also serious. The inspector noted that the person in charge "could not correctly answer all questions regarding main food borne illnesses." That citation was marked Priority Foundation, meaning it points to a gap in the foundational knowledge the state requires of whoever is running the floor.
A third, lower-level violation involved a storage bin of rice in the food prep area that was not labeled. That was corrected on the spot.
What These Violations Mean
Acidified rice is the reason sushi carries a different set of food safety rules than most grocery items. Raw fish served at room temperature is a known vehicle for bacterial growth, particularly from pathogens like Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus cereus. The acidity of properly prepared sushi rice, when its pH is measured and confirmed according to an approved protocol, is what keeps that risk in check.
When a facility receives state approval to operate a special process like acidification, it is signing on to a specific written procedure. Fujisan Sushi had that approval. The problem in February was that the employee responsible for the process was not following it. Using bare hands instead of a utensil to mix the slurry is not a technicality. It is the kind of deviation that can introduce contamination into the very step designed to make the product safe.
The person-in-charge knowledge violation compounds the concern. State rules require that someone with authority at a food establishment be able to correctly identify the major foodborne illnesses, their symptoms, and the conditions that allow them to spread. That requirement exists because the person in charge is the last line of defense when an inspector is not present. At Fujisan Sushi in February, the person filling that role could not answer those questions correctly.
The unlabeled rice bin, by contrast, is a lower-stakes issue. Unlabeled containers can cause employees to confuse ingredients or misjudge storage times, but it does not carry the same direct public health risk as the other two findings.
The Longer Record
Fujisan Sushi, The Villages: Inspection History
FDACS records show seven inspections at this location going back to March 2023. The shop has passed several of those visits with zero violations, including three focused inspections in 2024 and early 2025 and a preoperational check in October 2025.
The March 2025 inspection is worth noting. That visit produced four violations, one of which was a repeat, meaning inspectors had seen the same problem at a prior visit and it had not been resolved. The records do not specify which violation repeated, but the pattern of recurring findings across three separate sanitation inspections, 2023, 2025, and now 2026, suggests the facility has not fully stabilized its compliance in areas beyond the basic pass-or-fail threshold.
None of the violations from the February 4, 2026 inspection were marked as repeats. But the acidified rice procedure failure and the person-in-charge knowledge gap were not corrected on site in the way a simple labeling fix can be. The inspector noted that the person in charge demonstrated the correct procedure during the visit, but whether staff training has since addressed the underlying gaps is not reflected in the available records.
The February 2026 inspection closed with a result of Met Sanitation Inspection Requirements, meaning the shop was not ordered closed. As of that visit, the person in charge still could not correctly answer all questions about the major foodborne illnesses.