This case examines citizens', planners', and elected officials' responses to the proliferation of community-based residential facilities for disabled people in a large U.S. city. It traces an effort to rationalize a highly political siting process for these group homes. In the course of this effort, city planners surveying neighbors of group homes found that the neighbors cited benefits more often than problems associated with group homes. Planners also found that neighborhood resistance to the homes tended to evaporate a few months after the facilities opened. Although the planners recommended a streamlined siting process, elected officials decided against the change.