The following is a brief history of the Mary Cummings property (commonly known as the Boston property) and a proposed collective strategy involving Burlington, Woburn and the Cummings descendants moving forward.
The following are facts that are not in dispute;
In a will dated 11/13/1925 Mary Cummings of Woburn stated the following in article four, “to the City of Boston, Massachusetts, I give and devise all the land together with the buildings in the City of Woburn and the Town of Burlington.” This land totals approximately 218 acres of which approximately 40 acres is in Woburn and the remaining acreage is in Burlington.
The will further stipulates the following; “ the property to be held in trust to hold and keep the same forever open as a public pleasure ground, and to maintain and care for the same in a suitable manner in accordance with that purpose”. Mrs. Cummings also made provisions for an income stream to accomplish the upkeep and development of the property as a pleasure ground in the following ways:
Item 2 of the will provided that stock that Mrs. Cummings owned would be held in two trusts for the benefit of nephew Henry T. Cowles and his children. If Henry died prior to his children reaching age 21, the income of the trust would go to his children till that age and then the principal in the trusts would be turned over to Boston for the benefit of the Mary Cummings trust property.
Item 3 of the will stipulates that stock be given in trust for the benefit of her niece, Eunice C. Cowles. The income from the trust was to be given semi annually and at the death of her niece the remaining stock would be transferred to Boston for the benefit of the Cummings Trust property
In item four Mrs. Cummings stipulated that if Boston accepted the Burlington and Woburn land in trust then “I also give and devise to it the land and buildings thereon owned by me and numbered 53 North Market Street.”
In the event that Boston failed to accept the provisions of the will Mrs. Cummings included the following specific language in the will, “In case, however, said City of Boston shall decline or fail to accept said real estate in Woburn and Burlington for the purposes as aforesaid, I give and devise the same, together with all the other real and personal property herein given to said City of Boston for the accomplishment of said purposes, to the Playground and Recreation Association of America, in trust for the same purposes and conditions as are here in prescribed concerning the taking of the same by the said City of Boston.”
There are several items of note here. Mrs. Cummings intentions relative to the property is clear and unambiguous. This specific property was to be kept forever as a public pleasure ground and she made fall back provisions to convey the property to an entity that would dedicate itself to doing that. Mrs. Cummings did not burden the taxpayer of Boston in order to maintain or improve the property since she left assets and an income stream to accomplish the task.
The city of Boston has failed in its fiduciary responsibilities as it relates to the bequest held in trust. This is evident by the most recent suggestion by Mr. Paul J. Minihane, Chairman of the Boston Finance Commission that “funds are presently needed to maintain the soon to be completed Rose Kennedy Greenway” and selling the Cummings property would be “and excellent use of the Cummings Trust income”. According to the Boston Globe, this is the third such effort by the Finance Commission to float the idea of liquidating the property.
An assumption can be made that since members of the family have expressed an interest in having a park by the name of Mary Cummings on the land, and that Mrs. Cummings herself stipulated that this specific piece of property remain open forever then it would be apparent that the sale of the property should be out of the question.
Further assumptions can be made regarding Boston’s disinterest or unwillingness to meet the responsibilities of the trust bequest by examining the City’s performance since the 1930’s. Over that period of time virtually nothing has been done on the property in terms of capital improvements or even basic maintenance. During the past thirty years there has not even been a superficial attempt by the city to meet the minimum terms of the bequest. In fact, with the exception of Burlington’s efforts to negotiate an agreement to improve the property for recreation use, the only discussions Boston has had is about efforts to break the trust and sell the property.
In addition to its lack of attention to the tenets of the trust, there does not seem to be a readily available accounting of what happened to the assets left by Mrs. Cummings to achieve the trust’s goals.
Conclusions
Mrs. Cummings left clear instructions as to the disposition of this land. The descendants of the family have a right to the proper Cummings legacy. That legacy would not be the Rose Kennedy Greenway.
The land has enormous recreational and pleasure ground value to the residents of the communities as well as the residents of the commonwealth and is irreplaceable in the area as parkland.
Boston has no intention of meeting its obligations under the trust and has used assets intended for the trust for its own purposes (allegedly) since there is no available accounting of the funds.
The secondary potential trustee, The Playground and Recreation Association of America still exists as the National Recreation Association. Its history and evolution can be viewed at WWW.nrpa.org. It would seem an appropriate organization for the purpose of the will and in retrospect points out the wisdom of Mrs. Cummings fall back position.
Changing a trustee for negligence or non performance is under the purview of the attorney general’s office.
Recommendation
It is time to fulfill Mrs. Cumming wishes. A change of trustees should be pursued by petition to the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office. The NRPA.org should take action to replace the City of Boston in this role. If this is not possible then a partnership between Woburn and Burlington should be established in order to assume control of the trust as co-trustees along with Cummings family descendants and fulfill its intended purpose.
There is no room for compromise. Boston is not entitled to any financial interest in this property and any attempt by the city to profit in any way from 75 years of deplorable performance in the exercising of their fiduciary duty should be resisted strenuously.
