In a case that has captivated residents of Portland, Maine, a jury concluded that a landlord’s attempt to evict former mayor Ethan Strimling was a form of retaliation, allowing him to remain in his apartment despite the landlord’s wishes. This verdict not only affects Strimling but carries a broader significance for tenant rights within the city, where the battle for affordable housing is more heated than ever.
Ethan Strimling, who served as Portland’s mayor from 2015 to 2019 and was a Democratic state senator before that, has always been a figure of political intrigue. Known for his forthrightness, Strimling did not shy away from becoming an active participant in a tenants union that filed several complaints with the city. When the eviction efforts began in 2021, Strimling argued that he was being targeted for his involvement with the union. The landlord’s lawyer, however, claimed that the eviction was solely because Strimling was a difficult tenant, not because of his union activities.
What complicates the situation further is Maine’s unique eviction laws. In this state, landlords possess the liberty to evict tenants without providing a specific reason. However, the plot thickens with a 2020 Portland rent control ordinance that explicitly encourages the formation of tenants unions. Under this ordinance, any attempt to evict someone for union activities is unequivocally illegal. This law aims to provide tenants with a semblance of security amid soaring rents that now approach $2,000 for a two-bedroom apartment, a significant burden for many Portland residents.
Strimling’s initial attempt to argue retaliation was not met favorably by a judge, leading him to request a jury trial. The jury, in an 8-1 decision, sided with Strimling, allowing him to stay in his apartment located in the downtown Trelawny Building. This verdict sends a strong message to tenants and landlords alike. For tenants, it reassures them that joining or forming a union is within their rights and can offer them protections. Strimling himself emphasized the broader implications, expressing hope that this outcome would embolden other tenants to unionize and stand up for their rights.
Meanwhile, Geoffrey Rice, the landlord who owns the Trelawny Building, remained tight-lipped, declining to comment on the jury’s decision. The case has undoubtedly put a spotlight on the longstanding tension between landlords and tenants, particularly in an environment where housing is becoming increasingly unaffordable.
This case represents more than just a legal battle over an eviction; it underscores the growing urgency for tenant rights amid a housing crisis. The resulting jury decision fortifies the notion that tenants have a right to organize and protect their interests without the looming threat of retaliation. In the broader context, Portland’s housing crunch and climbing rents make the protection of such rights not just necessary but imperative.
As the city continues to grapple with these issues, the Strimling case may well become a landmark in the ongoing struggle for tenant rights and affordable housing in Portland. It is a reminder that even in the face of daunting odds, the collective power of tenants can lead to meaningful change.