The Van Zandt County Commissioners Court discussed a petition filed with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to form Rocky Creek (also referenced as Rocky Cedar Creek Branch) Municipal Utility District No. 1 and the county’s request for a public hearing.

A county staff member summarized the application as substantial — "about 300 pages" — and identified the TCEQ application/permit number WQ0016890001. The development proposed by the applicant, described in the package provided to commissioners, would include about 1,800 homes and an estimated 5,400 residents if the developer’s three-people-per-home estimate holds.

County staff explained most of the development lies within Kaufman County but that a portion crosses into Van Zandt County. The application includes a wastewater-treatment plan whose discharge would flow into a dry creek and ultimately into Cedar Creek Lake; staff said the county has formally requested a TCEQ public hearing and will post the application on the county website to facilitate public comment.

Commissioners discussed legal and regulatory implications, including county subdivision minimum-lot-size rules (the county’s one-acre minimum), whether formation of a MUD could alter applicability of those subdivision regulations for lots within the MUD, and how MUDs operate as taxing entities that may later issue bonds voted on by residents within the MUD. One commissioner noted the practical impacts on local services: "That density will require an increase in the judge's office, in the constable's office, in the sheriff's office," and also could increase traffic on FM 2965, where the project's entrance is proposed.

County staff said the application is publicly available on the TCEQ website but difficult to navigate; they provided a packet and a link and said the county would place the application on the county website by the end of the week to make commenting easier. No formal county veto power over a TCEQ decision was claimed; staff said the TCEQ will weigh public comments in deciding whether a hearing is warranted and will adjudicate the application.

The court’s action was procedural: the county judge placed the matter on the agenda, the county requested a hearing with TCEQ, and staff were directed to post the application and public-comment instructions. The court did not approve any development plans or bonds; those matters would follow TCEQ review and any subsequent local processes.