A petition against the partners behind a 1929 tower
A lawsuit filed in business court accuses The Baker Hotel Development Partners, LLC and one of its managers, Thomas “Randy” Nix, of fraud in the restoration of the Baker Hotel in Mineral Wells, Texas. The petition seeks an injunction against the developers. Every figure below comes from the pleading or from the defendants’ own statements. No court has ruled on any of it.
The building is a 14-story Spanish Colonial Revival tower at 201 East Hubbard Street, opened in 1929. The operator’s site markets 168 guest rooms and carries the line “OPENING 2029” above a three-year renovation.
The suit was filed on Monday 28 September 2026. Hotel Online carried the syndicated copy on 13 October 2026. Sally Sexton reported the story for the Weatherford Democrat.
The allegations the filing sets out
The petition quotes a construction budget of $125,000,000. It alleges misappropriation of about $3 million in developer fees, acquisition of more than $4 million in partnership interests, misapplication of up to $2 million in partnership funds, and attempted subordination of more than $10 million in existing partnership investments.
Laird Fairchild, a co-originator of the restoration and an original manager of the LLC, has contributed more than $1.03 million. He claims interests and developer fees of around $1.5 million were seized through a disputed foreclosure. Porfirio Dubón and his wife Jennifer, both disabled veterans, invested around $1.18 million.
The sequence the petition traces
The LLC formed on 5 March 2014 as a Texas limited liability company and served as managing general partner of a wider partnership of investors. Baker Hotel Holdings, LP formed in September 2015 with the LLC as its sole general partner. The board of managers grew from three members to four in April 2019, when Nix joined.
A January 2023 restructuring split the company into three equal interests held by G. Brint Ryan, by Nix and by the Baker Half Dozen. The petition cites higher costs, supply chain problems and higher interest rates. It states that the Half Dozen contributed $1.29 million, that Ryan and Nix agreed to convert $1.5 million of loan portions into partnership equity, and that the conversion never took place. It states that the partnership kept $1.04 million of that contribution while the loans kept accruing interest at 15 per cent.
Fairchild and Chad Patton resigned from the board and kept their shares. The petition alleges that Nix and Ryan then obtained two loans of $3.5 million on a misrepresented account of their board authority, that a $1 million contract went to a company whose principal is the son of Nix’s personal attorney, and that investor reporting fell from monthly to as much as six months apart.
In 2026 a notice of maturity default went to Baker Hotel Holdings, LP on a $3 million loan at 15 per cent, with Nix and Ryan named as lenders. In September 2026 they presented a merger combining the LLC with BH Newco, LP, an entity Nix created. Written consents were due on 3 October. The petition alleges objections from Fairchild and Jennifer Dubón and non-consent requests above 33 per cent, and that a Certificate of Merger reached the Texas Secretary of State claiming effect from 15 September 2026.
What the plaintiffs ask the court to do
The petition asks the court to void the foreclosure and the 2026 merger, restore positions as they stood before January 2023, order an accounting from 2019, and open the partnership records. It seeks attorney fees, damages, punitive damages against Nix, and a restraining order against Ryan and Nix.
Nix denies the claims
“There is no basis for this lawsuit, but that will all pan out,” Nix told the Weatherford Democrat. On the court process he said: “Right now, with it in the court system, I’ve got to let that play out.”
On the vote he said: “You’ve got the overwhelming majority of the shareholders that are agreeing to the path forward. And you have a couple of disgruntled partners that don’t like the path.” On the town he said: “When you’re painting this on Mineral Wells and the community, you’re tainting it.”
Nix and fellow manager Brint Ryan gave the newspaper a statement that responses would come through the court system. Nix said every decision had been made in the interest of shareholders and the community.
The funding stack and the 2029 date on the site
The renovation has run since 2008. Mineral Wells voters approved a share of local sales tax revenue for the hotel in 2014. The filing names federal and state historic tax credits, opportunity zone financing, a Mineral Wells tax increment financing district and 4B sales-tax funding as the sources assembled.
The group has pursued a USDA-backed loan under a rural economic development programme. Nix said the guarantee ceiling was removed and raised to around $25 million. On the schedule he said: “We’ll have a couple of years of construction once we get everything funded before we’re complete.”
The property’s own website presents a funded programme, with the 2029 opening year and the 168-room count. Nothing on that site refers to the petition, the default notice or the September merger.
What the Property Watch turns on
Two outcomes control the asset. The court can leave the September 2026 merger in place or void it. A restraining order would freeze further action by Ryan and Nix while the funding closes.
Three items stay unverified. The $125,000,000 budget is the pleading’s own figure. The USDA guarantee is Nix’s account of the facility. No reopening date has been published against that schedule.