Former staff alleges misconduct and revenue focus at Restoration Ranch; counsel and applicant dispute relevance

A former staff member testified during the Warren County zoning hearing that Restoration Ranch’s leadership shifted toward revenue‑driven decisions, increased placements and discouraged internal questions — allegations the organization’s counsel disputed as outside the narrow legal standards before the board.

Candy Spence identified herself as a former house mom present during Restoration Ranch’s launch and said she recorded conversations she believes show a change in priorities after the program began billing state and federal funding sources. Spence said operations evolved from an initially charitable impulse to a higher‑volume placement model and asserted donor funds had been solicited for larger campus plans that stalled.

Spence cited financial figures (as stated in her testimony): she said the organization’s gross revenue rose markedly since the program’s early years, and that donor‑supported fundraising and state billing had become central to operations. She also described staff turnover and said that staff who asked ‘‘hard questions’’ were pushed out.

Applicant counsel responded that those management and fundraising disputes are not directly relevant to whether the county’s zoning code standards are met for the Shawan Road parcel, and the counsel characterized much of the testimony about past employee disputes as not germane to the narrow criteria the commissioners must apply. Counsel also described strengthened screening and supervision practices at the program and pointed to planning staff and planning commission recommendations.

Commissioners declined to resolve the contested operational claims in the zoning hearing and instead asked staff to gather precise calls‑for‑service records and documentation the board can use in its compatibility analysis. The record remains open; the board continued the hearing to allow staff follow‑up before a final decision.