Rights panel sides with Down East tenants

loading...

AUGUSTA – The Maine Human Rights Commission sided Monday with two Washington County tenants in separate complaints against their landlords.

The commission found reasonable grounds in a discrimination complaint filed by Carol Vose, Anita Ellis and Jan Vose against Ronald and Sharon Rogowski of Crystal Lake, Ill.

The Rogowskis own a Jonesport house the three rented. The commission ruled that the Rogowskis retaliated against Carol Vose, Ellis and Jan Vose for a complaint about their eviction to federal housing authorities.

Complaints supported by the commission proceed to conciliation hearings. If that process fails, the complaint continues to Superior Court, where a final settlement can include monetary damages.

The commission split on complaints filed by JoAnn Pierce of Calais against C.S. Management Inc. and Calais Congregate Associates, both of Caribou.

The panel ruled the landlord retaliated against Pierce for filing the complaint, but denied her claim that the property owner discriminated against her by failing to accommodate her for health concerns.

In the Jonesport case, Vose, Ellis and Vose claimed they were improperly evicted and retaliated against by the Rogowskis.

Carol Vose and Anita Ellis negotiated a deal with the Rogowskis to renovate the Rogowskis’ Jonesport house in exchange for payment and free rent. Later, the deal changed so that Vose and Ellis paid rent.

When the Rogowskis learned that Vose’s son, Jan Vose, a sometime resident of the house, would be entering a rehabilitation center for drug use, they evicted the family, allegedly saying that they did not want their house used as a halfway house.

The Rogowskis also allegedly said they feared the house would be seized by law enforcement officers if Jan Vose possessed drugs at the property.

The tenants had to vacate the house within a day.

Barbara Lelli, an investigator for the rights commission, found no evidence that Jan Vose had drugs during his stays at the house, and also concluded the Rogowskis knew Vose suffered from mental health disabilities.

Attorney Daniel Pileggi represented the Rogowskis, who were not present Monday. He argued that Vose and Ellis did not barter their use of the house in exchange for their work, but rather were paid contractors who were staying at the workplace.

Pileggi said the Rogowskis evicted the family because the house fell into disrepair and they concluded that Vose and Ellis were not up to the renovation job. He also said the Rogowskis contacted law enforcement officials to report the theft of items from the house at their advice of another attorney.

The attorney also disputed that Jan Vose had disabilities.

Carol Vose, representing herself, her son, and Ellis, said Jan Vose had qualified for services from the state Bureau of Rehabilitation Services for depression and other mental illnesses.

She also said that in their haste to move out of the house, with the 24-hour deadline to vacate, friends helping them inadvertently had packed items that belonged to the Rogowskis. Almost all of those were returned before the landlords contacted law enforcement, she said.

Commission member Kristin Aiello called the complaint “a classic kind of case that the Maine Human Rights Act is meant to protect against.” The commission unanimously found reasonable grounds in both the discrimination and retaliation complaints.

In the Calais case, the commission ruled in a 3-2 vote that C.S. Management Inc. and Calais Congregate Associates retaliated against JoAnn Pierce by threatening to evict her from her Calais apartment when her rent was late.

Investigator Lelli said Pierce “is a bit of a thorn in [the landlord’s] side,” making frequent demands about the maintenance and security of the housing complex. “But even demanding tenants are entitled to not be discriminated against,” the investigator told commissioners.

The panel voted 5-0 that there are no reasonable grounds to conclude Pierce was discriminated against in the way the complex was operated. Pierce had claimed that mold, dust and other contaminants were allowed to be in the air of her apartment.

The commission found no reasonable grounds in the following complaints:

Sheila Argraves of Washburn v. Personal Services of Aroostook County of Presque Isle.

Dorothy Kinney of Eddington v. Eastern Maine Medical Center of Bangor.

Holly Pomelow of Searsmont v. State of Maine-Department of Public Safety.

William Morrison of Florida v. Darling’s of Bangor.

Christopher Duffy of Brunswick v. Cianbro Corp. of Pittsfield.

Tiffany Dodge of St. Albans v. New England Home Health Care of Bangor.

Lillian Bradeen of Bangor v. Grant Trailer Sales of Bangor.

Evelyn Dowling of Old Town v. Asian Palace Restaurant of Bangor.

Jackie Baker of Skowhegan v. Irving Oil of Bangor.

Bonnie Lindsey of Ellsworth v. VIP Inc. of Ellsworth.

Raymond Matteson Jr. of Houlton v. Aroostook County Correctional Facility and Aroostook County commissioners, both of Caribou.

Jaime Tibbetts of Canaan v. RehabWork of Albion.

Randy Gravel of Blaine v. McCain Foods USA Inc. of Easton.

Dina-Lee Ford of Unity v. Eastern Maine Medical Center of Bangor.

Bruce Adams of Clifton v. AA Electric Inc. of Bangor.

Nancy Montbriand of Bangor v. Amerigas Propane Co., Brewer.

Christine Lovell of Guilford v. Curves of Dover-Foxcroft.

William Carter of Newport v. Northeast Occupational Exchange, Bangor.

Gary Rees of Newport v. Town of Dexter.