The fallout continues from the cancellation of a youth behavioral health treatment center in Anderson that received a $25 million grant from the state of California.
The Anderson City Council is drafting a resolution to censure Councilwoman Susie Baugh who also is a financial officer at Anderson Community church and the wife of former Shasta County Supervisor Les Baugh, who is the church pastor. The council began pursuing censure of Susie Baugh after it was revealed that a grant application for the Pathways to Leadership campus project was signed using the councilwoman’s title as mayor rather than her position within the church.
Meanwhile, Anderson Community church, one of two organizations that initially partnered on the Pathways to Leadership campus project, announced on Facebook that they have filed a claim against the city of Anderson alleging “bias and due process violations tied to the cancellation” of the project. A claim is usually the first step someone takes before they file a lawsuit.
Also, Shasta County Supervisor Matt Plummer now proposes a policy requiring nonprofits to provide detailed financial and organizational information before the county is able to allocate them funding. Plummer told the Record Searchlight his idea was in part a response to the county’s arrangements with lesser known nonprofits such as Family Dynamics, the other organization involved in the Pathways to Leadership campus project.
The latest moves are in sharp contrast to an April 16 Facebook post by Anderson Community church, which announced the cancellation of the project and said “we’ve heard the community clearly.” There was no mention of bias and due process violations in this post.
Why is Anderson city council considering censuring Susie Baugh?
At a May 5 meeting, the Anderson council voted 4-1, with Susie Baugh opposing, to write a resolution censuring the councilwoman.
Councilmembers Darin Hale and Bonnie Simmons will draft the resolution with the intent to include an additional condition that Baugh be removed from the committees she serves on as councilmember.
The proposed censure is in response to actions Baugh took involving the Pathways to Leadership project during her tenure as mayor, which councilmembers expressed were improper and misleading.
Hale, who brought the item to the council, told the Record Searchlight he wants to censure Baugh because she represented herself as the mayor of Anderson on the application for a $25 million state grant for the Pathways to Leadership project. This, he said, was misleading to the state because the mayor of a city typically represents the entire council in their actions, but the Anderson council has not formally taken any action regarding the project.
Simmons also expressed disapproval of Baugh’s actions at the meeting, and said Baugh misrepresented the council in the grant application.
Referring to the application, Simmons said “I was reading that everything had been approved and I was like ‘wait a minute’ we haven’t seen anything, and so that was a completely false description that was submitted on a state application.”
At the meeting Baugh confirmed the existence of such a document, saying the error has since been corrected and she was not involved in its creation.
“I did not meet with anyone regarding this grant in the capacity of mayor … I did not authorize the use of my title as mayor. The grant writer has acknowledged and corrected this error,” said Baugh.
Simmons also objected to Susie Baugh’s involvement in the project on the grounds of it being a conflict of interest, and said there was “significant financial gain to be had” for Baugh “in the tune of a couple hundred-thousand dollars.”
“Mayor Susie Baugh should not have even been on that application when money is tied to projects. You were obligated to take no part in this application process as Mayor of the city of Anderson,” said Simmons.
Councilmember Mike Gallagher expressed disapproval of Baugh’s actions and said “It was a stinky project from the get-go and it should have never happened.”
Hale, Simmons and Councilmember Dan Gallier all said that they felt the council was not made adequately aware of project details prior to it being discussed at a March 24 county board meeting.
Baugh disagreed and said Anderson Community church had been in regular communication with the city.
Baugh said that in October 2025, she, as well as Les Baugh, notified Anderson City Manager Joey Forseth-Deshais about the grant application and details regarding the project. She said Forseth-Deshais declined to provide a letter of support.
Baugh said on March 13 she notified Forseth-Deshais “about the award” and Les Baugh communicated with Gallier about the award and project. She also said Anderson Community church held a formal meeting with city of Anderson staff regarding the project on April 1.
Gallier said he did speak with Les Baugh about a project involving youth, but “it wasn’t what we learned about at the board of supervisors meeting.”
Forseth-Deshais was not able to be reached for comment before deadline on May 6.
Anderson City Clerk Christy White said a special meeting to vote on the censure resolution will be held soon.
Neither Les Baugh, nor Anderson Community church responded to requests for comment before deadline on May 6.
Why is Anderson Community suing the city of Anderson?
In Anderson Community church’s Facebook post, the church specifically alleges that Hale and Gallagher “publicly opposed the project prior to and during the decision-making process, actions the (church) argues violated their obligation to remain neutral when acting in a quasi-judicial role.”
Hale has made numerous Facebook posts addressing the topic over the past month. Gallagher has made no posts on social media regarding the project.
As a result of their alleged bias, the church states the Pathways to Leadership campus project failed, which they say “represents not only a lost funding opportunity but a missed chance to expand access to treatment in a region facing ongoing mental health and substance use challenges.”
The church is seeking “unspecified damages,” a public apology delivered at city council, and “additional relief as deemed appropriate.”
At the May 5 Anderson council meeting, Les Baugh estimated the damages to be equal to “$325 million in long-term impact.”
Baugh also announced at the council meeting that Anderson Community church is submitting an “ADA grievance” against the city.
“Youth struggling with substance use disorder are part of a protected class, and local governments are required to ensure that decisions affecting them are made through neutral, unbiased, and evidence-based processes,” said Baugh.
The church’s complaints regarding this grievance are the same as in the notice of claim, alleging that Hale and Gallagher’s biases led to the failure of the project.
Hale and Plummer have suggested, though, that community backlash was a major reason why the project was cancelled.
In an interview with the Record Searchlight on May 5, Plummer said regarding the project that Anderson Community and Family Dynamics’ “lack of engagement with certain parties seeded distrust among the community in a way that really tilted the scales against it.”
Hale told the Record Searchlight the community “came out in droves” against the project.
Several speakers at an April 7 Anderson council meeting spoke in opposition of the project, raising concerns regarding the project’s proposed location, impact on property value, public safety, and overall transparency surrounding the project.
The church’s claim against the city officially states that “When adjudicating public proposals, elected officials are required to act as unbiased decision-makers,” and that by making judgments of the project before it came before the council, the councilmembers “undermined due process.”
Also, Susie Baugh at the council meeting said “the project was never allowed to be heard” because of Hale’s Facebook posts.
Simmons said that “nobody knew about” the project prior to its discussion at a March 24 board of supervisors meeting in which the project received the county’s financial support, and in the time since the project has never come before the Anderson council for a formal decision.
Hale said the project’s managers would have needed to submit a formal request to the city manager’s office for the item to be agendized. The Record Searchlight was unable to contact Forseth-Deshais, or representatives of Anderson Community church or Family Dynamics to ascertain if the project was ever officially submitted for council consideration.
As a legal basis for their claim, the church cites a California case titled “Petrovich Development Co., LLC v. City of Sacramento,” which they say “establishes that decision-makers must avoid even the appearance of bias.”
A summary of the case on Justia states that the case involved a lawsuit which alleged that a Sacramento city councilmember had made up their mind prior to voting on a conditional use permit for a gas station. The court agreed that the councilmember had not been neutral and unbiased prior to voting, and required the council to revote with that councilmember recused.
Hale said he is not able to speak on the notice of claim specifically as it “may or may not appear in closed session” at a city council meeting. However, Hale said his Facebook posts do not constitute himself taking an official stance on the project, and that he believes the case the church is using as a legal basis is being misused.
Gallagher declined to comment on the topic.
Les Baugh, Anderson Community church, Family Dynamics, and Anderson councilmembers Dan Gallier, Bonnie Simmons, and Susie Baugh were not able to be reached before deadline on May 6.
How does Plummer’s proposal connect to the Pathways to Leadership project?
At a May 5 Shasta County Board of Supervisors meeting, the board unanimously passed a motion by Plummer directing staff to bring back a policy that would require nonprofits to provide specific information to the board before they are awarded significant amounts of money.
Suggestions for information a nonprofit could be required to provide included recent 990 forms — an informational form submitted to the IRS by non-profits — and financial statements from the preceding 12 months. Plummer also listed six additional potential requirements which staff will consider:
Plummer told the Record Searchlight he was motivated to introduce the policy after the board awarded nearly $2 million to Family Dynamics — the nonprofit previously involved in the Pathways to Leadership project — and $250,000 to the nonprofit Our Heroes Dreams.
He said concerns arose after the fact, specifically regarding Family Dynamics, that the organization only had three board members, none of whom were independent.
Plummer also said he found that the Pathways to Leadership project was “not designed optimally” for Shasta County or Anderson and that the project organizers had not been “as transparent as possible.”
Family Dynamics was not able to be reached for comment before deadline on May 6.
The policy is expected to return for board approval in the coming months.
What was the Pathways to Leadership campus project?
The campus as planned would have been 25,000 square feet, and included four separate facilities designed to meet the needs of youth at different points on their recovery journey. These four facilities would have included a “20-bed children’s crisis residential program,” a “30-bed adolescent substance use treatment center,” a 10-bed apartment-style “stabilization and transitional care” facility for aging youth, and a publicly available mental health counseling center.
Anderson Community church would have donated land to build the behavioral health campus. Funding for the project would have come from a $25 million state grant and a $1.9 million contribution from the county.
Drew Askeland covers Redding and Shasta County government issues, as well as anything else that needs reporting for the Record Searchlight and USA Today Network. Reach him at drew.askeland@redding.com or (530) 225-8247. Please subscribe today to support our newsroom’s commitment to public service journalism.
This article originally appeared on Redding Record Searchlight: Fallout from scrapped mental health campus seen across Shasta
Reporting by Drew Askeland, Redding Record Searchlight / Redding Record Searchlight
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
