When Pool City in Cranberry Township sought a waiver from Gov. Tom Wolf's COVID-19-related business-closure order last year, it stressed the importance of its chemical sales to disinfect residential swimming pools and hot tubs.

Within two days, its waiver request was approved.

North of Pool City on Route 19, Alpine Pools requested a waiver for similar reasons, adding its chemicals also disinfect wells and cisterns.

That business received a denial five days later.

The more than 750 Butler County businesses that applied for waivers from Wolf's business-closure order last spring were subjected to many of the same inconsistencies and deficiencies described by the state's chief auditor in his report on the program, according to records received by the Eagle in an open records request.

Inconsistent decisions

Alpine and Pool City weren't the only county pool companies seeking waivers. Nor were they the only companies citing the same reasons to remain open, but receiving different responses.

Of the nine waiver applications county pool supply businesses submitted, one was approved, four were denied and four were told they didn't need a waiver in the first place.

State Auditor General Timothy L. DeFoor critiqued the program in part for the inconsistent decisions the state Department of Community and Economic Development made when evaluating businesses' requests. In many instances, DeFoor wrote, “the inclusion of key words in the application often resulted in favorable, but questionable, responses.”

In one example, from the pool supply applications, a business submitted an application on March 23, 2020, that was denied in three days. The same business, the day after its first application was denied, applied again, adding that it serviced plumbing with respect to swimming pools.

Responding to its second application, the state informed that company it didn't need a waiver to operate.

DeFoor's report identified nine industries in which inconsistencies were rife: appliance sales and servicing, gyms, beauty salons, massage parlors, notaries, pet services, real estate, construction and greenhouses and florist-related businesses.

In Butler County, those industries — and more — saw inconsistent decisions.

John Dornetto, owner of Dornetto Construction in Evans City, applied for a waiver for his business on March 24, 2020. He was told he couldn't operate his business.

But that wasn't the answer he'd heard others in the industry had received.

“A lot of the suppliers that were allowed to stay open — the supply chain people — were talking to some of their other customers trying to get a feel for what they did to get their application approved, and then helping us get our applications approved,” Dornetto said. “We filled out the application, we used the same terminology that other contractors just like us used to get the permit.”

More than 125 businesses that described themselves as being involved in construction applied for waivers. Of them, 23 received a waiver, 36 were told they didn't need one and 43 were denied. The remaining 26 didn't receive a yes or no answer, but rather a letter informing them of the state's policy on construction generally.

In another instance, a company applied for, and received, a waiver to finish remodeling a homeowner's kitchen.

Two days later, it applied for a waiver to finish remodeling the kitchen and shower of another customer.

The state denied that request.

Timeframes

On average, a Butler County business received the state's final response within 10 days.

Because the data provided by the state doesn't indicate whether its response to a business was revised, it's not clear if that number is affected by the later, revised answers given to businesses after the state established a quality control team for the waiver decisions that reviewed past answers.

But as averages work, the state took less time for some than for others.

Henry Dimmick, CEO of Butler-based Agr International, wasn't displeased about the speed with which DCED replied to his application for a waiver — even if the company couldn't continue physical operations.

“The process was pretty easy. If I remember, it was only a couple of pages of forms that I needed to file,” Dimmick said. “I got a response pretty quickly — I think it was less than 24 hours. At that time, quite frankly, I was somewhat impressed by how quickly things were able to move on such a large scale.”

The speed, he said, was helpful. Agr worked to shift workers to remote work if they were able, and they continued to pay all employees even if couldn't work from home.

Not all businesses, however, were pleased with the speed the state took to reply to their request.

Dornetto said he didn't receive word from DCED for several weeks.

“I kept looking to see how I could get a response, and I kept getting a, 'Well, it's in the queue and we're doing them in the order they came, we're doing them as fast as we can,'” he said.

Data provided by DCED show Dornetto didn't receive his final answer for 18 days. DeFoor said while the majority of applications were processed within a week, several didn't receive an answer for three to four weeks.

That, he wrote, was at least partly a result of DCED not establishing a timeframe by which it needed to answer applications.

“Although we understand that DCED faced significant challenges in implementing the waiver program in a limited time period, we also understand the frustration expressed by the business community regarding the lack of timely responses, particularly in light of potentially life-altering impact caused by forced business closures,” the report states.

Dornetto called the business-closure order “unorganized government overstep,” but noted he understood the reasoning behind it.

“I'm not opposed to government protecting people, but I feel like they weren't equipped to do any of the stuff they attempted to do,” he said.