Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Go Lake Havasu Transparency topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lake Havasu residents press council for transparency in $1.6M tourism contract

Lake Havasu City Council (work session) · March 11, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a March 10 work session, residents and former employees accused Go Lake Havasu of weak recordkeeping, possible conflicts of interest and hostile personnel practices; Go Lake Havasu's leaders defended their performance and urged governance improvements. The council agreed to bring a follow-up contract review to a future agenda.

Hundreds of residents and several former employees urged the Lake Havasu City Council on March 10 to demand clearer records and tighter oversight of Go Lake Havasu, the nonprofit that receives about $1.6 million annually from local lodging and restaurant taxes to promote tourism. The public hearing followed presentations by the city attorney and Go Lake Havasu leadership about the history and performance of the tourism contract.

Neil Tinsley, a resident who said he filed a public records request, told the council: "The city does not have conflict of interest disclosures for Go Lake Havasu board members. The city does not have expenditure summaries showing how that money was spent. The city does not have invoices or payment documentation tied to the $1.6 million paid out each year." He said the city approved a six-year contract despite those gaps and cited Arizona conflict-of-interest law (ARS 38-503) to question whether the mayor should have recused himself from the prior vote.

Former staff and board members gave similar warnings. Yan Cassis said he resigned under duress and described alleged mistreatment and unanswered written complaints; Pam Swenson, a former employee who left in 2023, said she encountered "an unethical, unprofessional organization" and received a cease-and-desist letter after speaking out. Reagan Ross, a former board member and staffer, said the contract puts "millions of taxpayer generated tourism revenue in the hands of a private organization with limited public oversight" and described examples she called nepotism and conflicts of interest.

Go Lake Havasu leaders replied that governance reforms are already under way. Christina Gallo, chair of the organization's board, said the board has worked in recent years to strengthen governance and that "our board meetings are open to the public and the minutes are posted on gocabeshu.com." CEO Sean Buckley described the destination-management organization as "data-driven," summarized marketing metrics and said the office and volunteer board perform distinct functions. Buckley acknowledged structural issues tied to the funding model and the board roster and recommended a full audit, a board-structure review, and stronger board reporting to the council: "Let's take a look at the board. Let's take a look at the board structure. Let's do a full audit," he said.

Other commenters focused on whether tourism dollars are being spent effectively. Event organizer Dave Johnson said large events deliver tens of thousands of visitors but criticized Go Lake Havasu's social advertising and creative, reporting that local small operators and individuals were outperforming the DMO on social platforms. Bob Barrett, a resident, reviewed the math behind the lodging and restaurant tax streams and urged the council to seek clearer ROI reporting.

Not all testimony recommended dismantling the organization. Dan Rody, western region manager for Arizona State Parks and an ex officio event-committee member, urged caution: "The answer is not to abolish everything," he said, and argued DMOs play a measurable role in attracting visitors and events.

Council members said they heard clear problems and suggested follow-up. Vice Mayor David Diaz requested a future council agenda item to examine the contract and consider making the council liaison a voting member of Go Lake Havasu's executive committee. Council members voiced concern about transparency and the structure of the funding (particularly the city's use of both lodging and restaurant taxes in the support stream). No formal motion or vote occurred during the work session; the council closed the public hearing and agreed to return the matter for further consideration.

What happens next: the council asked staff to place a follow-up contract review on a future meeting agenda and several council members said they want specific deliverables (financial records, conflict-disclosure forms and clear performance reports) before approving further long-term arrangements.