Van Zandt County commissioners oppose proposed Saline Creek reservoir if eminent domain required

Van Zandt County commissioners on a workshop night voted to oppose the proposed Grand/Saline (Saline) Creek reservoir if its construction would require the use of eminent domain to condemn private property, the court said in a resolution adopted after more than an hour of public comment.

The resolution, read into the record by a court speaker and adopted by voice vote, says the county supports protecting property rights and the ability of landowners to use their land, and it opposes the reservoir project if it would remove “substantial acreage” from the county and Grand Slam Independent School District tax rolls.

The action followed a lengthy public-comment period in which landowners, school-district officials and residents urged the commissioners to reject the City of Canton’s proposal and to oppose any out-of-jurisdiction use of eminent domain. Many speakers said the project would take family farms, harm wildlife and lower local property values. Donna Greer, who gave a street address during public comment, said, "We're losing our generational family land and our legacy." Jeanette Swainland, who described a 600-acre family tract, told the court, "Please help us keep our land." Michael Lewis, superintendent of Bransley Independent School District, said the school board had declined to use eminent domain to acquire land for a campus and urged the county to protect local landowners, calling the pattern of multiple large projects "an existential threat to a fundamental way of life for a whole portion of East Texas." Paula Marshall asked county officials directly, "Will the Van Zandt County taxpayers be on the hook in funding the build of the lake and the ongoing maintenance?" and urged commissioners to attend an upcoming water board meeting.

Speakers raised several recurring concerns: that some property owners were not personally notified of the project, that appraisal values near the proposed reservoir area have fallen (speakers cited declines up to "as much as 40%"), that agricultural acreage would be removed from production, and that Van Zandt County road, bridge and maintenance costs could increase if county infrastructure were required for the project. Multiple speakers also disputed the City of Canton’s stated need for new water supplies, citing prior studies and Region D water planning projections they said showed Canton had sufficient water for its projected growth.

After the public comments, the court read and discussed a written resolution that notes a prior 02/2009 resolution by Canton and calls for alternatives to involuntary takings. A motion to adopt the resolution was seconded and passed by voice vote; the formal motion text states the court "formally opposes the construction of [the] reservoir if the project would necessitate the taking of private property during the exercise of eminent domain powers" and specifically opposes permanent removal of substantial acreage from Van Zandt County and Grand Slam Independent School District tax rolls. The mover and seconder were not identified in the public transcript and no roll-call tally was given.

County officials said the court will continue to review the issue and hold further meetings; commenters asked the court to appear at a Region D water board meeting scheduled for Aug. 13 to oppose acceptance of Canton’s application. Commissioners also indicated they plan more public meetings to discuss specifics such as protection of water and property rights.

The resolution does not itself prevent the City of Canton or other entities from pursuing water projects; it expresses the county court’s formal opposition where condemnation or significant tax-base loss would result and is intended as a policy statement to guide county positions and public testimony going forward.

The court closed the workshop portion and moved to the regular agenda after adopting the resolution.