By Kate Callen / July 22, 2025 
An extraordinary case of seller’s remorse surfaced last weekend when French Gourmet owner Michel Malecot posted an anguished statement about a boycott of his Pacific Beach businesses.
Malecot did not seem sorry that he sold his property to Los Angeles developer Kalonymous for $6.5 million. He claims he was taken by surprise when the buyer announced plans to build a 23-story tower on the site. But he offered no apology to the Pacific Beach community for the blight the project could cause.
The restaurateur expressed one regret. Loyal customers who are furious about the sale no longer walk through the doors of his French Gourmet Restaurant and his Froggy’s Bar next door. That is costing him a ton of money.
In a July 19 social media post, “A Letter from Michel to our French Gourmet Community,” Malecot said he had planned to close the restaurant early this year, but “due to the love for my profession and responsibility to my longtime faithful employees, I chose to keep the French Gourmet open for another year.”
It never occurred to him that his devoted French Gourmet Community wouldn’t be on board with that.
“The first six months of 2025 have been a financial disaster,” Malecot wrote, “and I am depleting my personal resources to keep the French Gourmet afloat. I understand the frustration of the community with the potential development. I am praying for a resolution that will be beneficial to the community and to all parties involved.”
And what might that resolution be? Maybe 20 stories instead of 23?
As San Diegans across the city are rising up against monstrous buildings, the Kalonymous project has stoked an unsurpassed level of public opprobrium. Even YIMBY politicians like Congressman Scott Peters and Mayor Todd Gloria are tripping over one another to condemn the development.
[When elected officials who have been the darlings of the building industry speak out against any large-scale project, that tells you which way the political winds are blowing.]
In a February 3 OB Rag post, Gloria said he is working with State Senator Catherine Blakespeare (another YIMBY pol) to “close a gap in the state’s density bonus housing law” that has enabled developers like Kalonymous “to prioritize luxury hotels or other visitor accommodations rather than housing.”
Peters wasn’t worried about how the tall tower would damage the Pacific Beach community. His sole concern was about how the project might tarnish the building industry.
“Home builders I’ve spoken to worry,” he said in a December 2024 Rag story, “that it will taint the reputation of all development and be a poster child for those who resist all new housing.”
The Turquoise Tower application is already in the pipeline. The only obstacle in its path is the City Council, which has yet to approve it. A vote to deny the application would require an abundance of courage from Councilmembers.
None of this would be happening if Malecot had thought carefully about what an offer of $6.5 million from a Los Angeles developer might entail.
He could shed light on that by divulging what exactly Kalonymous told him about its development plans. Did the company mislead him by promising a smaller project? Did he ask probing questions? Did he urge the developer to meet community members and hear their concerns?
Or did he just pocket the check?
It’s hard to fault Malecot for getting as much money for his retirement as he could. But decisions have consequences. Given his huge Kalonymous windfall, he should not expect the community to sympathize that he “is depleting [his] personal resources” because his angry clientele has abandoned him.
The restauteur ends his letter by imploring the community to come back: “I am respectfully asking that you show your support for what has been a gem in the neighborhood since 1989!”
The demise of the much-loved French Gourmet is a sad chapter in the history of Pacific Beach. But Malecot wrote it himself
Guess he played the song “feelings” instead of ” take the money and run”. Soon as the first high rise hits that area, look out.
Great information! Unfortunately, the City Council will not get an opportunity to vote on this application. State law has stripped the City Council of its normal oversight role in this process. That is a major part of the problem with this particular project.
Karl, thank you for correcting that. I shouldn’t have assumed that an aberration of this magnitude needed city approval. That makes Malecot’s selling out of PB even worse.
Nobody knows what assertions the buyer made to him. I would not assume he knew, as I’ve seen many examples of a buyer telling whatever lie they thought the seller wanted to hear.
The city will have an opportunity, perhaps through staff, to argue with HCD that this fails one of the subjective requirements. Many codes have this in place, regarding public safety and welfare, or some other such language that they routinely ignore. And if that happens the developer probably has an appeal process, or else can litigate it at the state level. I don’t know that the city councilmembers will have any say on it, unless there ends up being a local legal settlement that needs their approval.
Sometimes a developer can’t or won’t fight such resistance. At 4700 Point Loma Ave, a group appealed the project to the Planning Commission, and succeeded based on their interpretation of the code language, and the developer didn’t fight it further. They put the property back up for sale. The PC decision likely devalued the property too. Or maybe it’ll become a pencil tower now.
I worked for Frenchie (that was his nickname), doing the catering thing way back when, always paid us cash, and feed us well, he was a hustler, glad he cashed out, he used to walk around the kitchen in his french accent singing every day I’m hustlin, hustlin,
Miss you Frenchie,
Casey Stevens
Wow, Karma worked quickly. The owner was totally inconsiderate to his surrounding neighbors, and his customers, so no wonder his customers have stopped spending their hard earned money in a guy that sold them down the river.
When you sell a property, you sell it. It becomes the property of the new buyer and they can do whatever they want with it. You do not have any contact with the buyer during the process. The real estate agent makes sure that you are separated from the buyer of the property so that “professionals” can handle the transaction.
When he sold the building, he simply saw an offer, accepted the offer, and was done. You don’t talk with the buyer and see if he is going to do what you want him to do. It’s HIS building to do what he wants.
Malecot made no effort to secure any protections for the North Pacific Beach community in writing prior to the sale of the property. Malecot could have required contractual building restrictions in return for transfer of the deed , imbedded in the terms of the sale of the property.
John, When someone owns the property they’re selling, for what I would imagine is about a 350% profit gauging by when he originally purchased it, then the value of the property would have blessed Malecot with plenty of time to responsibly select a buyer that would best reflect the community that supported him for 4 decades. He did not.
Now he’s paying the price for it because the community is boycotting his businesses and it’s eating into his $6.5 million windfall for betraying the North PB Community that supported him.
Take heart everyone, according to Trudy’s recounting below though, Malecot almost cried.
In the winter of ‘24, weeks after the first public protest of the tower, as I stood inside the cozy bakery area of the French Gourmet (FG- not to be confused with Editordude) waiting to introduce myself to the owner Michel, the swinging doors to the hallowed kitchen swung open and a slightly disheveled man wearing a plaid shirt came out. Two men approached him and said they lived nearby and had questions. About the tower. The trio stepped into the dining area and I moved as close as possible without seeming to be an interloper.
The conversation quickly became heated. The younger of the two men had just purchased a house nearby, not knowing a 23-story was in the works. This would impact his view and the enjoyment of his home. WTH, he demanded. Is this true?
Michel squirmed. He confessed that he had been lied to by the young son of the owner. The 32 y/o had come to the restaurant two years before and said that he wanted to build a 3-story apartment building at this beautiful location. He hoped to bring affordable housing to the neighborhood. Had paid $500K earnest money deposit.
Michel was almost crying, ‘if I had known he was lying, I wouldn’t have sold. I could have retired and built a nice little apartment building on these lots.’
The men left. I approached from the shadows. Introduced myself. We chatted, Michel gave me his business card. ‘Please, stay in touch. I need to know what the community thinks about this. I’m expecting the final payment of $6.5M at the end of January. If they don’t pay, then I can get out of the contract.’
Michel called me twice, talking for 20 minutes. I called him several times. His biggest concern was the community could upset things and Kalonymus would blame Michel for breaching their contract. They could sue him. He wanted to retire. His kids didn’t want to work in the restaurant business. He had already ended his catering contracts, and money was tight. He was very nervous.
Kalonymus paid the balance at the end of January.
The state housing commission passed the buck back to San Diego. It’s up to Development Services Department to show that the developer doesn’t need 20 extra stories to cost justify 5 low income units (rents would be $1K-1.5K under market rate) and 5 moderate income units (rent would be $200 or so less than market rate).
The other 203 units would command high rents, with the 3 bedroom penthouse getting $20K.
The man who had just bought the house nearby?
Thank you so much, Trudy and Casey, for your anecdotes. Michel has worked so hard and deserves a peaceful retirement.
No developer ever discloses their ultimate goal, for the simple capitalistic reason that if a seller knew what the developer was really up to, they’d likely increase the asking price. I went through it on a smaller scale in my condo building. A flipper bought the upstairs unit from a long-time owner in a private sale, telling him that she wanted it for her daughter who planned to attend UCSD. We were all happy to welcome the daughter to the building. But after putting everyone through months of construction hell while she upgraded the unit, she immediately turned around and sold it for a profit.
Having been through that, I believe Michel that Kalonymous’s real intent was hidden. In addition, given that other developers on Turquoise have always respected the three-story height limit, Michel would have had no reason to suspect how far this group would go to override the spirit of the law.
Let me add to my story. I was able to talk to the man who had just moved into the neighborhood. He was livid and heartbroken. No one buys a home in a single family home neighborhood expecting a 23-story tower to go up in their line of sight.
Michel kept this pending sale under his hat. Realtors didn’t know until late 2024 about this because the city was giving the project a quick ministerial review, as if it was a porch addition on a house, and this meant they could avoid telling the PB Planning Group. By chance, the PB PG found out. That’s how messed up the state and city building laws have become. The developers can walk into DSD with plans for a high rise and the city is expected to approve and permit the project in 30 days. And don’t charge any development fees for sewers, water, roads which may have to be replaced due to the increased population density at the location.
We used to call this getting away with murder.
Two years have passed since Kalonymus hired Matt Awbrey, former staffer for Mayor Faulconer, as their land use consultant on this project and zeroed in on the tiny carve out spit of land that doesn’t fall under the jurisdiction of the CA Coastal Commission.
Yup, .65 acre of prime coastal land for under $11M. And, oh, by the way. Michel’s customers who arrived during the rally, were shocked to find out the buildings were sold.
The owner. The developer. The city. They have kept this project hush-hush for 2 years. Why’s that?
This story isn’t about Malecot’s real estate transaction. It’s about his letter. I wouldn’t have written anything if he hadn’t made a public plea for sympathy because the boycott is hurting his business. He had every right to sell his property to the highest bidder with no questions asked. And his angry customers have every right to stay away from his restaurants. Like the story says, decisions have consequences. The Turquoise Tower will be an enduring symbol of monstrous development in the same way that 101 Ash Street is a symbol of civic malfeasance. That’s a hell of a legacy.
Yes. Sellers can put conditions on the sale of their property and do so in writing as a binding contract. It is hard to believe that this long time business and property owner was not aware of that and simply took the owner’s son at his word, based on an initial conversation well before the deal was sealed with professional advisers and attorneys doubtless involved. Sounds like willful blindness in the face of a high-dollar offer.
Now he’s facing the music. Somehow I doubt that he’s going to lose the majority of that $6.5 million. Yet he’s threatening layoffs of employees who deserve better after his promise to stay open. Showing some real remorse, including by making significant donations to groups that oppose the tower and showing up in person at protests would at least demonstrate sincere caring for the community.
This story got fueled because Michel knows this community is already suffering about the pending tower. It would have shown sensitivity, class and respect if he had kept his problems to himself instead of lashing out at the very people who feel victimized by him.
Our gloves are off, the fight is on. The tower, his restaurant, his finances are open game.
He didn’t feed PB and La Jolla for free for 50 years. PB and La Jolla supported his business.
He seems to have forgotten this.
Michel shouldn’t have blamed the community for his financial woes.
Trudy, I’m disheartened to read the words “our gloves are off, the fight is on.” Michel exercised his right as a property owner to sell to the highest bidder. Of course we are angry about the outcome. But should we wage war with him over that? Should his business be tagged as “fair game”? Michel is not the enemy. Elected officials who jettisoned community review and handed our city to developers are the enemy. They should be “fair game,” and we should be ruthless in pursuing them.
Sorry, but I am disheartened Kate, that you are not calling for Malecot to share some of his windfall profits to fight the Demon he has unleashed on California’s Coast.
Malecot is only sorry he got caught, outed and is facing the admonishment of boycotts from the public for being outed for his greedy self-serving decision.
Malecot knew what he was doing.
Kate, with all due respect, can we disperse with the BS mentality of “he is just as much victim as the community”? This chapter of history exemplifies the plausible deniability that has fostered legislators voting for bills they can later claim that had they known their contents would have not voted to support or deny, but conveniently they never bothered to read.
“I didn’t know” ignorance argument isn’t a defense recognized in Superior court, and it won’t fly as a defense in the court of public opinion either. Malecot is not innocent, so let’s please stop with the exceptions, the free passes and the benefits of the doubt.
We’re all screwed because of his decision, and this is costing our community our precious time, our blood, our sweat, and our treasure to fight now. Malecot deliberated then took the money. He knowingly took actions that are betraying the Pacific Beach Community.
Malecot has a $6.5million stack of cash he can draw from to compensate his employees. No reason for The French Gourmet or Froggy’s owner to lay anyone on his staff as a direct result of his own greedy, self-serving actions.
I mistakenly wrote 55 years. The correct number is 35 years.
Like the Roman arenas created by the government for spectacles, our government has created an open arena spread from one end to the other.
The developers know the game. Hire land use consultants who were formerly employed by the city.
Locals become the game.
Yes, we’re angry at the politicians.
Yes, we’re angry at the unscrupulous developers .
Yes, we’re angry at this business that hurt us by ‘accident’.
Malecot should not blame the community for his business downfall.
He should blame the politicians.
Kate, I think you are way off base. The owner of the French Gourmet had no responsibility to ask probing questions about the buyers of his property. In order to build a structure as big as what is “proposed” requires more than two properties, but you don’t mention that. You should be blaming the State for overriding local ordinances and allowing such a complex to be even considered.
I went to the French Gourmet last night for dinner and for a Wednesday night there was a steady stream of customers. I will continue to support the French Gourmet and take my protest to the City Council.
Perfect title. In January Chef delayed closing escrow because he then wanted to continue operating in 2025 AND insisted he have the parking lot next door. That led to termination of the lease next door and closing a 20-year, woman-run business. No sympathy here.
What he did was a bad bad thing. Now he will have to live with that on his conscience. I am not sorry for him.