Estimated Time to Read: 7 minutes
Colony Ridge, a large residential development in Liberty County northeast of Houston, has reached a $68 million settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice and the State of Texas. The resolution follows coordinated federal and state lawsuits alleging discriminatory lending, deceptive real estate practices, and violations of federal land sales disclosure laws.
The federal case was initiated in December 2023 by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the United States Department of Justice. In March 2024, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) filed a separate enforcement action. The settlement resolves those civil claims.
While the legal theories in the two cases overlapped in certain areas, the framing differed. The DOJ emphasized civil rights and consumer protection violations. The Texas Attorney General’s office emphasized immigration, public safety, and alleged systemic misconduct tied to the development’s growth.
Understanding both frameworks is essential to understanding the broader impact of the settlement.
Federal Civil Rights and Consumer Protection Allegations
The federal complaint alleged that Colony Ridge and affiliated entities targeted Hispanic consumers with high-interest seller-financed loans while failing to properly assess borrowers’ ability to repay.
According to the complaint, approximately 91% of recorded transactions between 2017 and 2022 involved at least one Hispanic consumer, despite the broader Houston metropolitan area being far less concentrated demographically. Federal regulators characterized this as discriminatory targeting in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act.
The complaint also cited high foreclosure rates in Liberty County tied to seller-financed loans. Regulators alleged that underwriting practices did not meaningfully evaluate income, assets, or financial obligations prior to extending credit.
The federal lawsuit further alleged violations of the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, including failure to file required Statements of Record and failure to provide Property Reports before contract execution.
Additionally, regulators alleged that lots were marketed as homesites despite periodic flooding and that English-only contracts were used in Spanish-language sales campaigns without accurate translations attached.
Texas Allegations Under the DTPA and Fraud Statutes
The Texas Attorney General’s lawsuit focused on deceptive trade practices, fraud in real estate transactions, and violations of federal consumer financial law enforceable by the State.
The complaint alleged misrepresentations regarding the availability of water, sewer, drainage, and electricity infrastructure. It also described allegations of digital marketing practices designed to generate consumer leads through misleading online listings.
The State further alleged that sales processes conducted primarily in Spanish culminated in English-only closing documents, with oral summaries that allegedly omitted material terms.
Where the federal complaint emphasized civil rights violations and lending practices, the State’s complaint emphasized deceptive business practices and public impact.
Immigration Controversy and Housing of Illegal Immigrants
Beyond consumer protection allegations, Colony Ridge became the center of a broader political controversy involving the housing of illegal immigrants.
The federal complaint did not frame its claims in immigration terms. Its focus remained on civil rights statutes and lending compliance.
The Texas Attorney General’s public communications, however, explicitly connected the enforcement action to immigration concerns. The development was described in press materials as functioning as a haven for individuals without lawful immigration status.
The controversy stemmed from several overlapping factors. Colony Ridge’s seller-financing model required limited traditional documentation. The development was marketed heavily in Spanish. The community experienced rapid growth, reportedly reaching tens of thousands of residents within a relatively short period. These conditions led critics to argue that the development’s structure facilitated property acquisition by individuals without lawful immigration status.
Legally, property ownership and immigration status are governed by different bodies of law. Federal immigration law regulates presence and employment. Real property transactions are generally governed by state law, contract law, and consumer protection statutes. Seller financing itself is not prohibited under immigration law. However, states retain authority to regulate land ownership and impose identification requirements in real estate transactions.
The settlement addresses part of this controversy prospectively. According to public statements, enhanced buyer verification requirements will apply going forward. The agreement also includes restrictions related to certain foreign land purchases and imposes identification safeguards.
The settlement does not retroactively adjudicate the immigration status of existing residents. It instead imposes forward-looking compliance standards aimed at preventing future regulatory gaps.
The immigration controversy surrounding Colony Ridge intersects with broader Texas policy debates about border security, foreign land ownership, and the fiscal impact of rapid population growth on schools, roads, law enforcement, and drainage infrastructure.
Infrastructure, Flooding, and Development Concerns
Both lawsuits raised concerns regarding infrastructure readiness.
The federal complaint alleged omissions regarding the infrastructure necessary to connect utilities. The Texas complaint referenced prior litigation and regulatory investigations concerning flooding and drainage failures.
Settlement terms reportedly require substantial infrastructure investment, including drainage remediation and flood mitigation. Independent engineering review and compliance monitoring are included as part of the settlement framework.
These provisions acknowledge that rapid residential growth without parallel infrastructure expansion creates regulatory and financial risk.
Key Terms of the $68 Million Settlement
The settlement imposes financial penalties totaling $68 million and requires operational reforms.
A portion of the funds will be directed toward infrastructure improvements. Another portion is designated for enforcement-related efforts and oversight.
The developers must implement enhanced underwriting standards to evaluate borrowers’ ability to repay. Advertising reforms require accurate representations regarding infrastructure availability and property readiness.
Translation safeguards are mandated when sales campaigns are conducted in Spanish.
The agreement also includes buyer identification requirements and freezes certain new residential platting activities for a defined period.
The settlement resolves civil enforcement claims but does not constitute an admission of liability.
Seller Financing and Foreclosure Model Under Scrutiny
Both lawsuits examined Colony Ridge’s seller-financing model.
According to the Texas complaint, Colony Ridge Land served as lender and mortgage servicer while offering high-interest loans with minimal underwriting. The complaint alleged foreclosure rates significantly above national averages.
The federal complaint similarly alleged high foreclosure volume and frequent reacquisition and resale of properties.
The settlement’s underwriting reforms directly respond to these allegations by requiring income verification and evaluation of financial obligations.
Political Takeaways from the Colony Ridge Settlement
The Colony Ridge case carries several political implications for Texas.
First, it illustrates the growing overlap between immigration policy and land development oversight. When large residential developments experience rapid demographic change, enforcement actions may take on broader political meaning beyond their statutory basis.
Second, it signals increased scrutiny of seller-financing models, particularly in communities marketed to non-English-speaking populations.
Third, it reinforces the enforceability of the federal land sales disclosure law, which has historically received less public attention than mortgage regulation.
Fourth, it highlights how infrastructure readiness and regulatory compliance can become central issues in developments experiencing accelerated growth.
Finally, the differing federal and state framing of the case demonstrates how identical facts can be interpreted through distinct legal and political lenses.
What the Colony Ridge Case Signals for Texas Policy
The $68 million Colony Ridge settlement represents a significant coordinated enforcement action involving federal civil rights law, federal land sales disclosure requirements, state deceptive trade practices statutes, and broader public policy debates.
The federal complaint centered on discriminatory lending and disclosure violations. The Texas Attorney General’s lawsuit emphasized deceptive practices and immigration-related concerns.
The settlement imposes financial penalties, infrastructure remediation, underwriting reforms, translation safeguards, buyer verification standards, and development restrictions.
For Texas policymakers and developers, the case underscores that rapid residential expansion, multilingual marketing, seller financing, and immigration-adjacent controversies can converge into layered regulatory exposure.
The civil litigation has concluded. The policy debate surrounding immigration, land ownership, and infrastructure accountability is likely to continue.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!
