By Jorge Casuso

May 1, 2026 -- The City Council declared a win-win Tuesday night after approving a long-stalled California Roadhouse lease, but the congratulatory statements may have been premature due to a last-minute verbal amendment.

The amendment by Councilmember Ellis Raskin inserted language into the lease to insure the "terms of worker recall and retention be consistent with our ordinance" ("Council Unanimously Approves Roadhouse Lease," April 30, 2026).

The amendment, approved with no legal clarification or discussion, created a final obstacle to a lease that had taken 10 months to negotiate, as the local hospitality workers union increased its pressure to include the terms, which City staff has cautioned may not legally apply.

Roadhouse owner Sean Ahaus had already agreed to hire back all the workers laid off after the previous tenant, Rusty's Surf Ranch, was shut down amid a unionization drive early last year ("Council to Vote on Roadhouse Lease," April 27, 2026).

But after the provision was added, Ahaus said he is ready to walk away from negotiations if a final agreement is not reached by the next Council meeting scheduled for May 12.

"We will be considering other options, including, but not limited to moving our California Roadhouse venue to Venice Beach and offering all of the same former Rusty's workers employment opportunities at our new relocated Venice Beach location," Ahaus said in a statement.

"A primary concern of California Roadhouse remains, as City Council continues to try to force and coerce recall/retention ordinance verbiage upon California Roadhouse, Inc, their owners and their employees."

The wording of the lease that 'mirrored' that of the city ordinances, Ahaus said, was added "even though the City has already acknowledged the ordinance does not legally apply to California Roadhouse."

Raskin's motion also added that "the terms of our recall and retention ordinance speak for themselves," which would seemingly eliminate cautionary language from City staff.

Staff's report to the Council on Tuesday noted that the Worker Protection Ordinance that went into effect on March 12 is "applicable to the lease on a going-forward basis" and does not apply retroactively to the Roadhouse, which entered negotiations more than eight months before it was approved..

"This approach is consistent with how ordinances are generally applied and case law, particularly given there are consequences for violation of the ordinance, including monetary damages," staff wrote.

"California courts have rejected attempts to apply ordinances retroactively when doing so would impose new liability for conduct occurring before enactment."

Ahaus also noted that worker retention laws only apply when a new tenant is taking over a space occupied by an existing business.

"None of it makes any sense," Ahaus said. "The previous tenant has been out of business for a year and four months. The ordinance only applies to a previous employer, and this is a new business."

The City Council, Ahaus said, "should be asking the City Attorney to express their position."

Asked by the Lookout to "clarify Councilmember Raskin's amendment or what the implications are for the lease," City officials did not provide a statement by deadline, adding they "don’t expect to have anything tonight."

In a statement Wednesday, Ahaus said, the Council "has been unable to demonstrate any need for these delays or any need for these so called 'additional worker protections,' in relationship to our lease."

Ahaus, a restaurateur who co-owns VITO restaurant on Ocean Park Boulevard, added he has a proven track record of following all laws and "treating over 1,000 of my former employees fairly."

"You can't protect someone if there's no threat," Ahaus told The Lookout. "This is overreaching."