Llano council halts negotiations with LCRA after residents warn firm water deal won’t deliver upstream supply

The Llano City Council voted to stop negotiations with the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) on a proposed firm water contract and to postpone consideration of the draft Water Conservation Plan and Drought Contingency Plan after more than an hour of public comment and council discussion.

The motion to "cease negotiation with LCRA on the firm water contract and postpone future consideration of the WCP and the DCP" was made by a council member (speaker 3) and seconded by speaker 14; the motion carried on a voice vote recorded as 3 to 1 in favor of pausing negotiations.

Residents who addressed the council said the contract was unlikely to provide usable water to an upstream community and warned of financial risk. "This is a bad deal for us," said Michael (speaker 12), a local resident who urged the council to turn it down. Linda Stevens (speaker 8) told the council the agreement amounted to "buying an insurance policy from a company that has no assets," questioning whether LCRA could guarantee deliveries to a community upstream of the Highland Lakes.

Several speakers pointed to operational uncertainties and incomplete answers from LCRA. "The most important operational details remain completely unaddressed," said a resident (speaker 6), noting the city's water attorney and staff had outstanding technical questions. City Manager Finley (speaker 10) told the council the LCRA response in the meeting packet addressed many scenarios, but he also offered to arrange further briefings and technical follow-up, including inviting Fries & Nichols — the city's contracted reliability analyst — to return with clarifications.

Speakers also raised alternatives and local options. Multiple commenters urged the city to pursue horizontal well drilling or dredging to increase local storage rather than contracting downstream: "For the cost of the $82,000 for two years, that would probably pay for a horizontal well to be drilled," one resident observed.

Council member concerns were procedural and substantive. Several members said they wanted more detailed modeling, probability estimates for senior-water-call scenarios, and legal review of trigger points before committing to a long-term contract. In the motion that carried, the council directed staff to pause negotiations and defer final action on the WCP and DCP until additional technical and legal information can be reviewed.

The item followed a recusal: Alderman Gilliland (speaker 7) announced a recusal from the conversation before public comment began. The council did not adopt the contract or the plans at the meeting.

Next steps noted by the city manager included offering a follow-up meeting with Fries & Nichols or the city's water attorney to address council questions and providing additional analysis of alternatives such as dredging or local storage enhancements.

(Reporters: Quotes in this story are taken from the public record of the council meeting.)