Irvine Co. serving up misinformation

Lucy Ann Luhan

To clarify some misunderstandings due to an article in the July 24

Daily Pilot, I would like to state that I am still the administrator

of a bed and breakfast and cooking school in Tuscany, Italy. The

article, “Soon, the answer will be tacos,” said I had been running it

until recently. I also continue to operate our restaurant, Luciana’s

in Dana Point, and What’s Cooking Catering Service.

Having received numerous calls condemning the Irvine Co. for their

statements made to the press regarding What’s Cooking Bistro, I felt

it best to ignore the issue. But, when the Irvine Co. attempted to

defend itself, as a company official did in a July 30 letter to the

editor from the Irvine Co.’s president of retail development, Keith

Eyrich, “A painful end to a long relationship with What’s Cooking,” I

felt a response to his statements is warranted.

* “Painful End.” If so painful, why did they kick us out after we

took out a loan to remodel, with three more years on our lease?

Concerning the termination of the lease, we were told what

statements will be made to the public, “Luhan family will focus their

attention on another restaurant.” That is not the reason for our

departure. Following the Daily Pilot article, we received a notice

from the Irvine Co.’s attorney that stated, “your client has made a

series of statements to the media that clearly violate the express

terms of the termination agreement.... We certainly hope that this

actionable conduct by your client does not persist.” Are they ashamed

of their conduct, or does the Irvine Co. have something to hide?

* “A difficult decision designed to help the Luhans out of a

difficult financial situation.” I, the guarantor of the lease, had

never been contacted by the Irvine Co., nor were our finances

discussed. The Irvine Co. decided to inform the press to make the

company look innocent, not considering the detrimental effect their

statements would have on our other businesses, employees and

purveyors.

When informed by our attorney that the Irvine Co. wanted us to

leave the center, they were asked if they had another tenant. They

answered, “no.” Unfortunately for the Irvine Co. we knew the future

tenant who was considering the location, whom I understand was

forbidden to tell us of the company’s plan.

Proof of the Irvine Co.’s mishandling of our situation can be

viewed in the front page of the Daily Pilot article, in a statement

made by Jennifer Heiger, Irvine Co. spokeswoman, that we were six

months behind in rent. I resent very much this defamation of our

family.

Does one really believe that the Irvine Co. would allow six

months? Then Eyrich wrote in his letter to the editor that we were

three months behind, in the back pages of the paper. There seems to

be no shame in defaming a family if it makes the company look good.

* “Their success is our success.” Do they really believe the

public would believe this? All the calls I have received prove

differently.

The time finally arrived that the center was attractive and the

area developed; this could have been the best opportunity in 28 years

to truly become successful.

Never did I realize until this occurred how many tenants

experience this situation, but nobody bothers to tell their story. I

would not either, until I read Eyrich’s letter on how they did this

to help us “avoid further losses.” If sincere, they could reimburse

us for the loan we had to get to remodel the Bistro, knowing we had a

five-year extension [on the lease]. That would help avoid further

losses more than words.

Having experienced drain problems throughout the years, we have

always corrected the problem as required in our lease, at our

expense. Recently the stench became so horrendous, sending customers

out of our restaurant, that an examination by a plumbing firm was

called. The management firm of the Irvine Co. was reluctant to come

to assist, since the problem was always handled by us.

It was only when we threatened management that we would report

them to the county health department because of the raw sewerage

floating in our grease trap that they decided to correct the problem.

This created a deep trench in the middle of our kitchen. Our staff

had to step over and view the four-foot-high pile of dirt, consisting

of raw sewerage, human waste and toilet tissue. We had no choice but

to close our operations. When asked to be reimbursed for our closure,

we were denied. At this point the Bistro threatened the Irvine Co.’s

management company, for the first time, with a lawsuit. Could this be

the reason that we were not given a chance to stay?

We would like to thank our friends, customers, and the wonderful

neighborhood that has supported us through the 28 years in this

center and to thank all those who have called us expressing their

sorrow in seeing us leave. Special thanks to Mayor Bromberg and the

City Council, who presented our family with a proclamation last

month, honoring the Luhan family. He expressed the council’s regret

of our departure and how the closing of What’s Cooking Bistro will be

a loss to the community, Newport’s first family bistro.

In conclusion, there appears to be a contradiction as to the cause

of our departure. According to our attorney, a statement made by the

Irvine Co. to him was, “We don’t want them in the center anymore,”

yet that is not to be publicized. What they are asking us to sign is

that even though we are being kicked out, we must tell the public we

wanted to be kicked out. I see no need to make this inaccurate

statement to our community.

Certainly we will concentrate on our location in Dana Point --

Luciana’s Ristorante -- but that is not the reason for our departure.

* EDITOR’S NOTE: Lucy Ann Luhan was the owner of What’s Cooking

Bistro, which closed in July.