THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

AVENTURINE ONE, LLC,

Plaintiffs,

v.

THE CITY OF MARSHALL, TEXAS,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO.

JURY DEMAND

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Aventurine One, LLC (“Aventurine”), through its undersigned counsel, alleges 

as follows for its Complaint against Defendant, The City of Marshall, Texas (the “City” or 

“Defendant”). 

PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff Aventurine One, LLC is Kentucky limited liability company with its 

principal place of business in Prospect, Kentucky. 

2. Defendant City of Marshall is an incorporated municipality in Harrison County, 

Texas. Defendant may be served with process by service on the Mayor, Amy Ware, at 401 S. 

Alamo Boulevard, P.O. Box 698, Marshall, Texas 75670-0698. 

3. This lawsuit asserts claims under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.

This Court accordingly has Federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. This Court has 

supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 to hear and determine Plaintiff’s state law 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1
2

claim because that claim is related to Plaintiff’s federal law claims and arise out of a common 

nucleus of operative facts. Plaintiff’s state law claim forms part of the same case or controversy 

under Article III of the United States Constitution. 

4. The claims asserted in this Complaint arise out of transactions and occurrences 

within the Eastern District of Texas. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

FACTS

5. Aventurine is a commercial development company specializing in transforming 

historic structures into affordable housing.

6. Based on several studies conducted by Aventurine and expressed by the Housing 

Authority of the City of Marshall, Aventurine proposed to revitalize the Blue Buckle building 

located at 200 S Columbus Street and 306 E Fannin Street, Marshall Texas (the “Site”), utilizing 

its pre-existing historic infrastructure to create 47-49 multifamily housing units (the “Project”), in 

order to fulfill an unmet need within the City, affordable housing. 

7. On January 4, 2023, Aventurine entered into an Option to Purchase Agreement 

(“Purchase Agreement”) securing its option to purchase the Site for the Project.

8. The Project was to be funded solely by low income housing tax credits allocated by 

the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (“TDHCA”) for affordable housing 

projects. These housing tax credits may be used by the tax credit investors and limited partners of 

an LIHTC housing project to offset a portion of their federal tax liability. In exchange for the 

housing tax credits, the owner of an affordable housing development must lease the units to eligible 

low-income tenants for a minimum 15-year LIHTC compliance period, and must guarantee 

financial performance. 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 2 of 13 PageID #: 2
3

9. In order to obtain approval for an affordable housing project, application must be 

made to the TDHCA and the developer must, among other factors, demonstrate a need for such a 

project within the community in which it is proposed. Aventurine submitted the 2023 Multifamily 

Uniform Application (the “LIHTC Application”) for approval of the proposed development in 

February 2023, including data showing a need for the project and financial feasibility. The LIHTC 

Application was supported by a Texas State Representative and the Housing Authority of the City 

of Marshall. TDHCA releases a Qualified Allocation Plan each year that includes competitive 

scoring criteria based on the state’s most critical affordable housing needs. The Blue Buckle 

application was not only the highest scoring application in its designated TDHCA Region, but also 

the highest scoring application of any Rural application in the entire state of Texas. Further, the 

application included additional support from the City, which passed Resolution of Support No. R23-03, affirming the City’s support for the Project and authorizing the City and its representatives 

“to take all other necessary or appropriate steps or actions associated with this development 

funding.” Resolution of Support No. R-23-03, in recognizing both the need for affordable housing 

and finding the Project was consistent with the safety and welfare of the community, was passed

by City Council on February 23, 2023 with a vote of 6-1. 

10. In order to secure the LIHTC, Aventurine is required to have all appropriate zoning 

in place within approximately two (2) weeks of the tax credit award allocation, which was received 

on August 28, 2023.

11. Upon information and belief, the Project is currently zoned correctly, however, 

Aventurine requires a special use permit because the proposed redevelopment will constitute threestory multifamily dwellings.

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 3 of 13 PageID #: 3
4

12. On February 28, 2023, Aventurine submitted an application for a special use permit 

to approve the proposed development of multifamily housing. The City’s Director of Community 

Development provided a letter in support of Aventurine that stated the “proposed special use 

permit is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan-Future Land Use Map which designates 

the property future use as downtown activity. If/when the proposed special use permit is approved 

by the City Council, the entire parcel will be eligible to be permitted...”

13. On March 13, 2023, as part of the special use permit approval process, the Planning

and Zoning Commission (the “Commission”) held its meeting and public hearing to discuss the 

Project and any questions members of the community may have for the developers. During this 

meeting, the Commission’s initially denied the special use permit based on illegal and

discriminatory objections to “low-income housing” that were voiced by the Commission and City 

residents. Specifically, a common objection was that the neighbors of the Project feared for their 

safety and the racial composition of the community as a result of the affordable housing 

development: 

...do you have a demographic report showing how you’re going to fill this 

building...

...also, are there going to be any low-income dwellings or is it designed for lower 

income [individuals]...

...I’ve heard rumors about it and. . . I guess my concern was, is the location the best 

location because my biggest thing is safety and security...directly across from this 

project there’s a school, a [private] school...and then it is on the outskirts of our 

downtown development district. I wonder does it fit into what we’re trying to do 

with that. Can you speak to what kind of precautions or plans are in place to 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 4 of 13 PageID #: 4
5

minimize any negative impact to our downtown area and to the school that is 

immediately across the street...

...as far as tenants, you going to have some kind of process to make sure that they 

are... meeting certain conditions? Maybe clearing process, [for example], not been 

incarcerated...before they put anybody on section eight they usually do a pretty 

good job on the tenants part...taking background checks... 

...seems like it would make sense in another location... 

...it looks nice but the fact that there is a private school one mile up the street...

14. As it was clear that the abrupt change in support for the Project was based on overtly 

discriminatory and racist commentary, Aventurine requested reconsideration of the Commission’s 

denial of its permit application. 

15. Upon information and belief, representatives of the City understood the comments 

made during the March 13, 2023 Commission Meeting were improperly considered during the 

permit process, and directed that the Zoning Commissioners undergo formal training to prevent 

future improper and discriminatory considerations by the Commission.

16. On June 12, 2023, the Commission held another public hearing in reconsideration 

of Aventurine’s permit application. At this meeting, the Commission approved Aventurine’s 

application, voting 3-2.

17. After approving of Aventurine’s permit application, the Commission submitted its 

recommendation to City Council for its final approval. 

18. The City’s final approval was originally scheduled for the July 13, 2023 Council 

Meeting, but was then changed to July 23, 2023 purported so they could host a “Town Meeting”

over the Project that was already supported by the Council. 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 5 of 13 PageID #: 5
6

19. On July 27, 2023, Aventurine was notified that it was awarded the LIHTC, based 

on all factors considered in the award of federal tax credits, including scrutiny of the experience 

of the Project’s development team. 

20. After delaying the City Council vote, then City then again moved approval of the 

special use permit to the August 24, 2023 Council Meeting. Based on comments made by council 

member and some members of the community, Aventurine again notified the City of major 

concerns it had regarding “opposition” statements that were invoking improper and illegal 

considerations.

21. On August 24, 2023, the City finally placed the permit approval on the agenda. 

Aventurine, for the fifth time, presented the same information on Project logistics and the extensive 

amount of work that has already gone into this redevelopment. Although there were no questions 

or comments from the City Council members themselves, representatives of Aventurine were 

verbally attacked and defamed by some members of the community who spoke in opposition to 

the Project. When one person attempted to speak in favor of the Project, he was immediately shut 

down by the City from speaking, yet the City then allowed opponents to make unsubstantiated and 

false personal and professional attacks on the Aventurine and its planned Project. The improper 

and discriminatory questions and comments regarding the Project, included but were not limited 

to: statements about the likelihood of potential child predators becoming residents; the increase in 

crime rate if the redevelopment was successful; the “type” of people that may reside in the 

redevelopment, among other things.

22. Further, in the Council Meeting, packets of information purportedly about 

Aventurine and other affordable tax credit projects were submitted to the City, but Aventurine was 

not given access to those materials and was denied to opportunity to respond to them.

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 6 of 13 PageID #: 6
7

23. Although nothing about the Project had changed since the City issued its Resolution 

of Support and City Council did not ask any questions of Aventurine or about the Project at the 

Council Meeting, after months of continuous pressure and fear mongering of community members 

and certain City officials, the City ultimately and improperly denied Aventurine’s permit.

24. On August 28, 2023, the TDHCA provided Aventurine with a Housing Tax Credit 

Program Commitment (the “Commitment”), which must be executed after receiving proper zoning 

and prior to September 27, 2023. If Aventurine does not execute the Commitment by the 

aforementioned date, it will lose the LIHTC allocation thereby rendering the Project impossible to 

build. Aventurine will be damaged in excess of $800,000.00 for costs and damages incurred to 

date, and will suffer additional damages will in excess of $2,500,000.00 in lost profits and 

consequential damages. 

25. Prior to the deadline to execute the Commitment, Aventurine noticed the City of the 

deadline, and the dramatic consequences and significant loss it would incur. Despite its awareness 

of damages that would occur, the City did nothing.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 

VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL FAIR HOUSING ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a)

26. Aventurine realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 25 above, 

as if fully set forth herein. 

27. By the actions described above, the City has violated, and/or continues to violate, 

the rights of Aventurine, under the federal Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq., by:

(a) Making unavailable or denying dwellings to persons because of their 

income status, race, color, and national origin, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a); and 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 7 of 13 PageID #: 7
8

(b) Discriminating on the basis of race, color, and national origin in the terms, 

conditions, or privileges of the provision of services or facilities in connection with the sale or 

rental of a dwelling, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(b). 

(c) Coercing, intimidating, or interfering with Plaintiff’s efforts to exercise or 

enjoy their rights to be free of discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin, in 

violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3617. 

28. The City has engaged in, and continues to engage in, a policy, pattern, and practice 

of discrimination against Aventurine by improperly and illegally refusing to issue a special use 

zoning permit to Aventurine, on the basis that the housing sought to be developed by Plaintiff 

constitutes “low-income housing,” clearly in violation of the Fair Housing Act. 

29. The City has intentionally, knowingly, and continuously engaged in practices 

described above, with the intent of denying equal housing opportunities to Aventurine. 

30. As a result of the City’s conduct, Aventurine has suffered damages, including: 

architectural and engineering contractual fees, legal fees, earnest money for the Site, 

environmental fees, historic fees, LIHTC application fees, third-party studies and reports, and staff 

times and related fees, in excess of $800,000.00.

31. As an aggrieved person under the Act, Aventurine is entitled to relief under 42 

U.S.C. § 3613(a). That relief includes both actual damages, as described above, and punitive 

damages, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 3613(c)(2). 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 8 of 13 PageID #: 8
9

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF THE TEXAS FAIR HOUSING ACT

32. Aventurine realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 25 above, 

as if fully set forth herein. 

33. The City’s actions and inactions, as described above, make unavailable or deny to 

numerous individuals housing because of their race, color, religion, familial status, or national 

origin. Both because of the City’s discriminatory intent and because of the discriminatory effects 

of its actions and inactions, the City’s conduct is a brash violation of the Texas Fair Housing Act 

(the “Texas Act”), Tex. Prop. Code § 301.001 et seq. 

34. As aggrieved persons under the Texas Act, Aventurine is entitled to relief under 

Tex. Prop. Code § 301.151(a). That relief includes both actual damages, as described above, 

punitive damages, and reasonable attorney’s fees and court costs, pursuant to Tex. Prop. Code § 

301.153. 

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 

VIOLATION OF THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE OF THE FOURTEENTH 

AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION

35. Aventurine realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 25 above, 

as if fully set forth herein. 

36. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the Texas Constitution 

further guarantee that Aventurine be afforded the equal protection of the laws, which prohibits the 

City from treating Aventurine, in the exercise of its rights, differently than similarly situated 

persons and entities absent a compelling state interest, or even a substantial relation to an important 

or significant government purpose or a rational basis. 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 9 of 13 PageID #: 9
10

37. As a result of the proposed Project, the City treated Aventurine in a manner which 

it has never treated other developers who have applied for special use permits in Marshall. The 

City has never subjected any similarly situated individual or entity applying for a permit to the 

species of process to which it subjected Aventurine as a mechanism to ensuring that neighbors of 

Marshall succeeded in opposing Aventurine’s special use permit application in order to prevent 

the “attack” of people of color and low socioeconomic status upon their neighborhood. Indeed, the 

myriad obstacles which the City erected to prevent Aventurine from obtaining its special use 

permit to develop its Property were intended to, and ultimately did, facilitate the unlawful and 

unconstitutional denial of Aventurine’s permit application. 

38. There is no rational basis, and certainly no compelling state interest, that can justify 

the City’s actions as described above, which led to City Council’s denial of Aventurine’s

Application. 

39. The City has, with discriminatory intent or purpose, implemented enforced, 

condoned, sanctioned, acquiesced to, and encouraged a policy, pattern, practice or custom of 

violating the clearly established equal protection rights of Aventurine. 

40. The City’s conduct demonstrates its deliberate indifference to the violation of 

Aventurine’s constitutional rights to equal protection. 

41. As a direct and proximate result of the City’s actions, Aventurine has suffered harm 

including, without limitation, the violation of its constitutional rights and further the income 

Aventurine would have earned through the development of the Project. 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 10 of 13 PageID #: 10
11

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS 

42. Aventurine realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 25 above, 

as if fully set forth herein. 

43. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States 

Constitution prohibits deprivations of life, liberty, or property without fundamental fairness 

through governmental conduct that offends the community’s sense of justice, decency, and fair 

play. Substantive due process also prevents the government from engaging in conduct that shocks 

the conscience or interferes with rights implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. 

44. The City has adopted, implemented, enforced, condoned, sanctioned, acquiesced 

to, and encouraged a policy, pattern, practice, or custom of violating the clearly established due 

process rights of Aventurine, including, without limitation, by acquiescing the racially-motivated 

campaign of the City’s neighbors to oppose Aventurine’s special use permit in order to prevent 

Aventurine from developing the Project. 

45. The City knew or should have known that its conduct as described above was 

unlawful and unconstitutional. The City’s encouragement, condonation, or acquiescence to the use 

of the permitting application process to delay and manipulate Aventurine’s ability to obtain a 

special use permit to develop its Project in order that the racist effort to oppose its permit 

application constitutes gross negligence amounting to deliberate indifference to the constitutional 

rights of Aventurine. Indeed, the City’s course of conduct as described above reflects its clear 

intent to deprive Aventurine of its constitutional rights. 

46. As a direct and proximate result of the City’s infringement upon Aventurine’s 

substantive due process rights, it has suffered harm including, without limitation, the violation of 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 11 of 13 PageID #: 11
12

its constitutional rights and further the income Aventurine would have earned through the 

development of the Project. 

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

ATTORNEYS’ FEES FOR BAD FAITH 

47. Aventurine realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 25 above, 

as if fully set forth herein. 

48. The intentional, bad faith refusal by the City to comply with its statutory obligations 

under both federal and Texas laws, have caused Aventurine unnecessary trouble and expense and 

have completed Aventurine to commence this lawsuit to enforce its rights. 

49. As this lawsuit was commenced because of the intentional bad faith of the City, 

Aventurine is entitled to recover its attorneys’ fees and other expenses of litigation from the City

under 42 U.S.C. § 3613(c) and Tex. Prop. Code § 301.153. 

50. Aventurine is entitled to a judgment against the City under 42 U.S.C. § 3613(c) and 

Tex. Prop. Code § 301.153, for its attorneys’ fees and other expenses of litigation in such amounts 

as will be proven at the trial of this case. 

PRAYER OF RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court: 

(a) Declare that Defendant’s acts, practices, and policies complained of herein violated 

and violate Plaintiff’s rights as secured by the Fair Housing Act, as amended, 42 

U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.; the Equal Protection clause and the Substantive Due Process 

clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; the “affirmatively 

furthering” obligations of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3608; and the Texas 

Fair Housing Act, Tex. Prop. Code § 301.001 et seq.

(b) Enjoin Defendant, its agents, employees, successors, assigns, and those acting in 

active concert, combination or participation with them, from engaging in any 

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 12 of 13 PageID #: 12
13

policies or practices that deprive Plaintiff of its rights secured by any and all of the 

statutes cited in sub-paragraph (a), above, including among other things: 

(ii) Enjoining Defendant and its agents, employees, successors, and assigns, 

from engaging in any other discriminatory acts that perpetuate or contribute 

to segregation in the City of Marshall; and 

(iii) Ordering Defendant to take and/or fund affirmative steps, supervised by this 

Court, to overcome the effects of past discriminatory practices, including 

the funding of remedial activities necessary to overcome the perpetuation 

of segregation in the City of Marshall; 

(c) Compensatory damages in an amount this Court shall consider to be just, fair, and 

reasonable; 

(d) Punitive damages; 

(e) Injunctive relief requiring the City to issue Aventurine a special use permit, and 

any and all other approvals necessary to permit Aventurine to continue with the 

Project; 

(d) Award Plaintiff its costs and attorneys’ fees in this action; and 

(e) Award such other relief as this Court deems reasonable, necessary and just.

This the 29th day of September, 2023.

 /s/ William T. Hughey

William T. Hughey (TBN: 10245500)

 THE HUGHEY LAW FIRM

 P.O. BOX 2012

 Marshall, TX 75671

 Telephone: (903) 472-3719

 Facsimile: (866) 823-7185

 Hugheylaw@Sbcglobal.net

 Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 2:23-cv-00451-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/29/23 Page 13 of 13 PageID #: 13