Group Homes for the Mentally Retarded in Maine: Legislative Intent and Administrative Process

Historically, mentally retarded citizens of Maine have been confined to Pineland Center, the state's principal institution for the mentally retarded. In 1975 a class action suit, Wuori v. Zitnay, was filed in federal district court on behalf of "involuntarily confined" Pineland residents and "conditionally released" residents "in need of care . . . in a humane and healthful . . . environment." Three years later agencies and officials of the State of Maine entered into a consent judgment which laid down a "comprehensive plan designed to bring about speedy and meaningful relief" to the plaintiff class. The relief granted was premised upon the right of each member of the class to be provided the least restrictive and most normal living conditions possible. Accordingly, pursuant to individual determinations of need, mentally retarded persons were to be released from the centralized Pineland facility and placed in small facilities integrated into the communities of the state. The court appointed a special master to monitor the implementation of the consent judgment. Concurrently with the Pineland litigation, both federal and state legislation on mental retardation established a clear legislative purpose promoting community-based facilities. Such community-based facilities include group homes for the mentally retarded. Group homes in Maine now number nearly thirty, almost all of which are operated by non-profit community-based organizations. The group homes are certified by the Department of Human Services as intermediate care facilities for the mentally retarded (ICF/MRs) and are therefore eligible for Medicaid funding. This apparent success story of legislative and judicial relief is belied by a less well-known story of delay and frustration caused by conflicts between different levels and agencies of government. For example, local governments may restrict the development of group homes through use of the zoning power. Moreover, just as the consent decree "can be rendered dysfunctional by a state court applying a local zoning ordinance," the internal conflicts and processes of state administration may also hamper the implementation of the decree and the legislation.