City crews dismantled the patio outside the Mediterranean restaurant Les Amis at 6:30 am on October 27. The owner, Jinan Montecristo, could no longer afford the space after Fullerton raised outdoor dining fees by 90%. The small business owner tried to negotiate a fair solution by meeting with councilmembers, city staff, and the mayor, but was met with broken promises, bureaucratic obstruction, and favoritism toward political allies. This is the story of how a small business lost its patio.
In June 2022, the Fullerton City Council voted to “update outdoor dining fees to market rate.” For restaurants serving alcohol, that meant raising rates from $0.90 to $1.71 per square foot; a 90% increase. City staff determined those numbers internally and were granted discretion on when to implement them.
Two years later, in late 2024, Montecristo was informed that her prior agreement was void and replaced with a new one reflecting the higher rates. The change greatly increased her costs, making the patio, one of the city’s most vibrant community spaces, financially impossible to sustain. Her options were simple: sign or remove the patio. She signed to buy time.
Montecristo sought help from city leaders and was invited to meet with Mayor Fred Jung. She described his behavior as “condescending and rude,” with Jung repeatedly going off-topic about how people accuse him of being controlled by “a certain developer.” When she redirected the discussion, Jung said he couldn’t do anything about the fees due to an ongoing lawsuit involving Mickey’s Pub, but told her to make good-faith payments and circle back later.
Montecristo then met with City Manager Eric Levitt and Public Works Director Stephen Bise to explore a purchase or long-term lease for the patio space, which sits on city-owned property. Purchasing it would have given her stability, but staff said a sale wasn’t feasible. They suggested an easement, a right to use the space while the city retains ownership. Montecristo agreed, but the easement was denied by the City Council in closed session, without any public explanation.
That closed-session denial was unusual. The Brown Act allows private meetings only for narrow purposes, like real estate negotiations or pending litigation. Deciding a small-business easement behind closed doors deprived Montecristo of the opportunity to make her case publicly and left other business owners wondering whether political factors were at play.
In July, City Manager Levitt announced his resignation and eventual move to San Bernardino. Before leaving, he and the Interim City Manager Eddy Manfro met with Montecristo again and offered a 90-day stay; time for the Council to potentially agendize a discussion on patio fees or for her to bring her account into compliance. Montecristo paid $3,900 in back rent to demonstrate good faith.
She also began organizing a small business coalition to advocate against city policies that made operations harder. Mayor Jung took offense, telling her that any business owner with concerns should speak to him directly. Another owner did, and shortly afterward received a steep discount on their patio rate. That owner later told Montecristo the Council was unlikely to revisit the outdoor dining issue anytime soon.
Ninety days passed with no Council discussion. Several meetings were cancelled for having “nothing of note” on the agenda. When the deadline arrived, City staff removed the patio before sunrise. The space now sits empty, awaiting conversion back into a wide, unused sidewalk.
Throughout the dispute, Tony Bushala’s political blog mocked Les Amis, calling its owners “squatters.” Bushala is a real estate investor and major political donor whose spending has helped elect a majority of the current Council. He also leases City-owned property for his Santa Fe Express Café, and pays $0 for his patio space.
When the disparity was brought up publicly, Mayor Jung and Councilmember Jamie Valencia defended Bushala’s free patio, claiming it’s open to nonpatrons. But the patio is fenced and displays a sign reading:
“Due to limited seating, there is a 45-minute limit for customers. No loitering. Thank you.”
Montecristo said her own patio was equally open, welcoming anyone who wished to sit and enjoy the music so long as they were respectful.
Bushala’s personal comments only deepened the irony. According to Montecristo, he once told her, “You’re an idiot for paying them for that patio,” encouraging her to seek an abatement, only for his blog to attack her for not paying during the dispute.
Outdoor dining is rarely a profit center. It brings extra costs for staff, heaters, maintenance, and, in Les Amis’ case, live musicians. Restaurants maintain patios to beautify downtown, attract foot traffic, and create a sense of community. “Our patio is our thank you to the community,” Montecristo said.
Charging excessive fees doesn’t raise meaningful revenue; it only drives out small businesses and weakens the city’s character. What was once a lively corner filled with music and conversation is now a lifeless expanse of concrete.
Fullerton’s leaders call this “market rate.” But when City Hall sets the market, political access decides who gets to stay.
Share this:
Discover more from Fullerton Observer
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Community Voices, Local Business, Local Government, Local News
I do not understand why the city did not hold a council meeting to discuss the entire small business patio issues before tearing Les Amis patio down. What was the urgency? Under whose direction was that done? Appears that Jung was involved in that very rash decision.
That patio was built on an unused extreemly wide passthrough from Willshire to the Amerige parking lot and obstructed no one in any way.
And the Les Amis patio is very unlike the completely enclosed new part of the building at Mickey’s Pub (corner of Harbor and Commonwealth) built on a narrow city sidewalk and which removed several mature trees. Personally – while I can understand the anger from some about the Mickey’s “patio” city give-away – I think tearing it down at this point is also ridiculous – though Mickey’s should certainly at least have to pay for the use of city property that permanent part of the building now occupies – instead our city is in litigation over it. How much will that be costing the city?
And I am still furious that Mulberry Street Walk on Wilshire patio was so unfairly taken down after they spent money to create such a nice atmosphere – and the entire destroying of the Walk on Wilshire debacle. Also a Jung/Bushala-created poor decision.
We need three better council members to replace Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia – who each do nothing to enhance the city for either residents or small businesses.
Did councilman Zahra vote to nearly double the rent on Le Amis?
If so, your outrage should also extend to him.
Mario – I don’t remember if Zahra voted yes or no on raising patio rates back in 2022 but I do remember in 2025 he asked that the city bring patio fees back to council after Les Amis owner and son came to council in July (or was it August?) about the issues they were having. Zahra’s motion to agendize a look at the problems of the patio fees and to see what could be done was seconded by Charles. It takes two councilmembers or the mayor to agendize something so that discussion should have come up – but was pushed to the Dec meeting. In the meantime at end of October – before the council discussion came up – the patio was destroyed. There was no urgency. The patio left ample space for both pedestrians and vehicles to pass through. Just makes no sense to me.
you dont have to remember. You can just check the voting record
Jack – True – though searching through all the meeting agendas in 2022 would be a big pain.
I am less interested in whether a councilmember made a bad vote than I am in when that is brought to council attention he or she agrees to rehear the issue. I can forgive our amateur Councilmembers from making mistaken votes if they repair them when the consequences of their votes are revealed. I don’t expect them to be perfect I expect them to be reasonable.
Broken promises as in paying their rent after given many chances?!?
Jeff – try re-reading the article. The fee issues were supposed to be scheduled for a council re-consideration but the patio was torn down before the meeting date set in December took place.
The real issue isn’t whether Les Amis was in arrears or Zahra voted for it. That is a distraction. This moment is about the soul of our city and the community we want to become. The real issues are:
1. The city’s patio-space fees have long been prohibitively high for small businesses. Cities like Brea and Laguna Beach charge reasonable rates for patios on city-owned land because they recognize that outdoor dining is both a community asset and an economic driver. Fullerton could easily follow this small business friendly model—but chooses not to.
2. We increasingly see two Fullertons: one for wealthy donors and institutions aligned with the Giveaway Gang, and another for everyone else—small business owners, working families, and residents who simply want a community that supports their well-being.
3. The council majority continues to make perplexing decisions with real consequences for real people—choices that destabilize small businesses, undermine our economic vitality, and erode the tax base. These decisions are digging a financial hole WE will be asked fill, likely through a potential sales-tax increase. In essence, they are asking us to pay for their giveaways and inability to govern.
4. Our city’s debt is ballooning under this council’s leadership, even as our roads, libraries, parks, and other public amenities drift further into disrepair.
5. The word around the county is that Fullerton is becoming the most corrupt city in Orange County. That reputation is embarrassing—and deeply undeserved—for a city filled with extraordinary people that do not reflect the council majority whatsoever.
Sounds to me like the city is saving you money, and as for, “Our patio is our thank you to the community,” really? Come on now…
Seems like an entitled culture problem to me, but what do I know.