The Fullerton City Council, at its July 15, 2025, meeting, considered a lease extension and expansion request by Bushala Brothers, Inc. of properties at the Fullerton Transportation Center. The company currently leases the Train Station, Cafe, and adjacent properties at 120-140 East Santa Fe Avenue. The company requested to amend its lease, dating back to a 1990 and 1992 Redevelopment Agency agreement, which includes two ten-year options to renew through 2047. They asked to extend the option to renew through 2060. The proposal also sought to expand the leased area and assigned additional responsibilities to the tenant. Because the current lease isn’t up for renewal until 2027, some questioned why it was being brought up now.
The controversy surrounding the lease extension for Bushala Brothers, Inc. (BBI) included concerns brought up about the company’s alleged past lease violations, very low lease rate, and that the company is currently included in a $400 million lawsuit.
Critics, including Councilmember Zahra, and Mayor Protem Charles, pointed out that Bushala Brothers Inc. previously subleased sections of the property without city approval, likely violating lease terms. Additionally, there are doubts about the company’s promise to open a new restaurant, which has been made numerous times over the past 20 years without implementation.
Currently, Bushala, Inc. pays $0.29 per square foot per month ($3.48/yr per sq ft) for 6,248 square feet, totaling approximately $22,000 annually. (Current commercial lease market rate per square foot per year was not provided during the discussion but according to Cityfeet.com the typical range is from $27 to $48/per square foot/per year)
With Council approval, the expansion to the new area (Area 8), would bring the per square foot price to $2 per square foot per month ($24/yr), or around $45,000 a year for that additional space only. The existing lease payments for the rest of theproperty of $0.29/s/mo ($3.48/sf/per year) will gradually increase to market rates starting in 2047, with annual increases of 10% over four years.
The lease amendment featured a triple-net structure, placing maintenance, insurance, and utilities responsibilities on the tenant. The lease also offers rent credits up to 75% of eligible costs for tenant-financed improvements, capped at $190,400.
After extensive questioning from Councilmember Zahra, Mayor Pro Tem Dr. Shana Charles, and the public, it became clear that the company had promised a restaurant for the past 20+ years, and that the company is currently subleasing sections 3 and 5 without informing the city (an alleged violation of the current lease terms). Tony Bushala and George Bushala Jr. – who were present at the session – were unable to answer questions about why the company hadn’t developed the promised restaurant in the current sections of 3, 5, and 6, nor why section 8 was so vital. When asked about this, George Bushala Jr. said that previous councils had prevented development. (see map)
City Attorney Jones answered no when asked if the $400 million lawsuit, which names BBI and the property, could createa liability to the city in approving a new lease that drops the complainant (Al Bushala) who was on the old lease.
Despite these concerns, the lease expansion was approved by a vote of 3-2 (Council Member Dr Ahmad Zahra and Mayor Pro Tem Dr. Shana Charles opposed).
Visit the city website “Meeting & Agendas” tab to watch the video of this meeting. https://fullerton.granicus.com/player/clip/2099?view_id=2&redirect=true
According to Sunayana Thomas, Director of Community & Economic Development the patio is not charged a fee because it is “open to the public.”
A couple of the businesses that subleased from Bushala Brothers, Inc without the City being informed.
071525 CED Property Lease 120-140 E Santa Fe Ave Exhibit A
071525 CED Property Lease 120-140 E Santa Fe Ave Agenda Report
Share this:
Discover more from Fullerton Observer
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Local Business, Local Events, Local Government, Local News
0.29 per square foot? Very generous for downtown real estate leases that are more like $2 a square foot market rate.
Plus this property is embroiled in the $400 million Bushala family lawsuit.
I don’t understand the urgency to approve this lease extension and expansion in one night for a lease not up until 2027.
Does it have something to do with the current lawsuit against Bushala Bros Inc?
The renewed lease does allow the transfer of the lease to two companies controlled by three Bushala family members but not not mentioned in the lawsuit.
Or is the urgency due to whatever is going on with the proposed hotel adjacent to the property.
There were and are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding the council majority decision to accept the new lease and expansion.
This confusing and evidently hastily assembled article, wherein the author changes tenses between past and future, suggests no fewer than five times that Bushala Bros., Inc. somehow violated its lease terms for the Fullerton Depot by subletting two different spaces on the property without notifying the the City of Fullerton, but nowhere even attempts to ascertain whether or not these allegations are founded in fact. Is that too much work for the paper?
The article also repeats a claim made by Mayor Pro tem Charles in a mass email sent by her following the council meeting that Bushala Bros. failed to adequately answer her question of why they had not previously opened a restaurant like the one now proposed for the north side of the station. In fact, George Bushala, Jr. directly responded during the meeting that city staff had, in prior years, been uncooperative with Bushala Bros. about the project. Had Dr. Charles not almost incessantly talked over Mr. Bushala from the dais as he attempted to answer her questions she might have better heard his response. I refer readers to the video of the meeting.
This author lazily concludes with the assertion that further oversight of the lease is warranted because of “the concerns surrounding the company’s past commitments, alleged lease violations, and lack of properly maintaining the property per the lease agreement stipulations,” without bothering to cite any of these supposed past commitments or maintenance issues at all.
Response by Editor Saskia Kennedy: I made some changes. I hope it is better.