Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trusts And Funds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lancaster committees debate seeking larger payouts, possible legal steps to reclaim legacy trust funds
Summary
Members of Lancaster’s Spending and Emmons Smith committees told the Select Board they are exploring higher distributions from local trusts and possible legal action to recover Dow Fund money they say may have been routed to a Maine organization; the board asked for the attorneys’ findings before taking action.
Rob Christie, speaking as a member of the Emmons Smith Fund and the Colonel Town Spending Committee, told the Lancaster Select Board on April 20 that attorneys believe a Dow Fund trust may hold roughly $350,000–$400,000 and that the named beneficiary — St. Andrews Hospital in Booth Bay Harbor — closed in 2013. Christie said about $150,000–$160,000 may have been paid to an organization in Maine that the committee believes should have gone to Lancaster for the benefit of the needy.
Christie said the Emmons Smith Fund voted to spend $5,000 to hire counsel and that retaining a Maine attorney could add roughly $2,000–$3,000 in costs. He described attorneys’ next recommended step as sending a demand letter to the Rhode Island trustee and consulting the local probate court to clarify whether Lancaster is entitled to residual funds under the will.
Selectman Leon Rideout said he wants to review the attorneys’ findings before the board acts, noting the board has not previously discussed initiating court action and that any individual board member would be cautious about supporting litigation on the town’s behalf without a fuller record. Selectman Kathy-Jean Lavoie and others said they supported the committees continuing their work and presenting the legal findings to the board for consideration.
The Spending Committee also discussed the Colonel Town Trust’s payout rate. Rob Christie described a new investment structure that allows the Investment Committee to set distributions at 3%, 4% or 5%; the Spending Committee has asked for a 5% distribution to assist with tax relief. Adam Adair, a member of the Spending Committee, presented an executive summary and projections indicating that a 5% payout would still be covered by investment returns, but Rideout emphasized the committee overseeing investments is focused on long-term solvency and that the Select Board cannot direct the Investment Committee to change its policy.
The board asked the committees to provide the attorneys’ documentation and the Spending Committee’s projections before the Select Board considers any formal direction or court action. No motion, ordinance, or formal change in distribution policy was approved at the meeting.
The matter may return to the Select Board after the committees provide the requested legal opinions and financial projections.
