Commission finds no reasonable grounds in tenant harassment and accommodation dispute with Sanford Housing Authority

5906760 · September 22, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Amanda Minks told the commission she faces ongoing harassment from a neighboring tenant and persistent odors and behavior that she says interfere with her quiet enjoyment; the commission concluded the administrative record did not establish unlawful discrimination under the Maine Human Rights Act.

The Maine Human Rights Commission voted to find no reasonable grounds in a housing discrimination complaint brought by Amanda Minks against Sanford Housing Authority and an individual tenant.

Minks told the commission that a neighboring tenant repeatedly smoked marijuana in shared spaces, used racial slurs and engaged in stalking behavior that she said interfered with her ability to live in her apartment. She said she sought a transfer and that housing staff had not provided an alternative unit that met her needs; she also described difficulties with communication and what she called inconsistent responses from housing staff.

Sanford Housing’s counsel, Attorney Snyder, said Sanford Housing has documented and responded to Minks’s complaints, has issued lease violations and acted when appropriate, and has granted the complainant a reasonable-accommodation request after receipt of a doctor’s note. Snyder said the housing authority is limited by inventory constraints and cannot evict or relocate a tenant without meeting the statutory standards for eviction.

Investigator New Berlin told commissioners that the written record and interviews did not show unlawful discrimination tied to disability or a protected characteristic, though the investigator acknowledged Minks’s account of difficult and sometimes threatening behavior. The investigator noted other tenants have sought restraining orders against the same individual, but that the court filings presented to the investigator did not show permanent restraining orders in the complainant’s favor.

Commissioners said they found the complainant’s presentation courageous but that the commission’s legal standard requires proof tying adverse housing actions to a protected characteristic; they adopted the investigator’s recommendation to find no reasonable grounds. The commission will send a written notice of the decision to the parties.