Page 18 THE EVERETT ADVOCATE – FRiDAy, OCTObER 18, 2024 SPORTS | FROM PAGE 14 ing up against host Medford (after press deadline) on Oct. 16. Field Hockey The field hockey team (64-1) played three games last week, splitting up the outcomes with a win (non-league Greater Lowell Tech, 7-0, on Oct. 7), loss (Malden, 1-0, on Oct. 11) and tie (non-league Northeast Voke, 0-0, on Oct. 9). The Tide is seeded 39th in the Division 2 power rankings, as of Oct. 15. They are currently in the playoffs, and as long as they stay at or above .500, they will make the postseason. CITY OF EVERETT - LEGAL NOTICE - Department of Planning and Development 484 Broadway, Room 25 Everett, Massachusetts 02149 NOTICE OF INTENT TO REQUEST THE RELEASE OF FUNDS (NOI/RROF) REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF FUNDS To all interested agencies, groups, and persons: On or about November 5, 2024, the City of Everett will submit a request to the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) for the release of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (PL 93-383), as amended, to undertake a project known as: FY 2024 Everett Mini-Entitlement Plan Grant, consisting of the following project activities: Public Social Services: Funding five agencies. The activity cited above is exempt from review under 24 CFR part 58.34(a). The grant will also consist of one activity that is categorically excluded under 24 CFR Part 58.35(b): Everett Housing Rehabilitation Program*: Continuation of the City’s housing rehabilitation program, providing deferred payment loans to low- and moderate-income residents in Everett’s CDBG target areas. The program finances repairs to address substandard conditions, code deficiencies and energy conservation needs. Total Funding: $925,000 from CDBG funds Location: Everett, Middlesex County, Massachusetts *The proposed activity listed above is categorically excluded under HUD regulations at 24 CFR Part 58 from National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. An Environmental Review Record (ERR) that documents the environmental determinations for this project is on file at the Everett Department of Planning and Development, City Hall, 484 Broadway, Room 25, Everett, MA 02149 and may be examined or copied Monday and Thursday, 8:00 A.M. to 7:30 P.M., and Tuesday and Wednesday, 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. PUBLIC COMMENTS Any individual, group or agency may submit written comments on the ERR to the Community Development Department. All comments received by October 25, 2024, will be considered by the City of Everett prior to authorizing submission of a request for release of funds. RELEASE OF FUNDS The City of Everett certifies to EOHLC that Tom Philbin, in his capacity as the Environmental Certifying Officer for the City of Everett, consents to accept the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts if an action is brought to enforce responsibilities in relation to the environmental review process and that these responsibilities have been satisfied. EOHLC’s approval of the certification satisfies its responsibilities under NEPA and related laws and authorities and allows the City of Everett to use Program funds. OBJECTIONS TO RELEASE OF FUNDS EOHLC will accept objections to its release of funds and the City of Everett’s certification for a period of fifteen days following the anticipated submission date or its actual receipt of the request (whichever is later) only if they are on one of the following bases: (a) the certification was not executed by the Certifying Officer of the City of Everett; (b) the City of Everett has omitted a step or failed to make a decision or finding required by HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 58; (c) the grant recipient or other participants in the development process have committed funds, incurred costs or undertaken activities not authorized by 24 CFR Part 58 before approval of a release of funds by EOHLC; or (d) another Federal agency acting pursuant to 40 CFR Part 1504 has submitted a written finding that the project is unsatisfactory from the standpoint of environmental quality. Objections must be prepared and submitted in accordance with the required procedures (24 CFR Part 58, Sec. 58.76) and shall be addressed to the Executive Offices of Housing and Livable Communities, Division of Community Services, 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 300, Boston, MA 02114. Potential objectors should contact the Executive Offices of Housing and Livable Communities to verify the actual last day of the objection period. Tom Philbin, Conservation Planner Environmental Certifying Officer City of Everett, Massachusetts October 18, 2024 Gibney vs. Hossack SJC Case T his was a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) case decided in April of this year regarding words used in the Last Will and Testament of Heather Hossack. In this case, the testator, Heather Hossack used the words in a devise to her mother “if she survives me”. the SJC in this case took the position that the phrase “if she survives me”, together with other provisions in her Will, demonstrated, as a matter of law, the testator’s intent to avoid application of the anti-lapse statute under Mass General Laws, Chapter 190B, Section 2-603, which provides that where a devisee falls within a class of specific familial relatives of the testator and where the devisee predeceases the testator, the devise does not lapse but falls to the living issue of the predeceased devisee. The anti-lapse statute is based on a judgment about the typical testator’s probable intent to preserve the devise for the predeceased devisee’s lineal descendants, thereby keeping the devise in the family. A testator can avoid the default presumption by indicating a contrary intention shown by the terms of the Will. This case presented the question of whether a testator’s choice to make a devise to an individual “if she survives me”, demonstrates a contrary intention to avoid the application of the anti-lapse statute. The SJC in this case answered this question in the positive, and the devise then fell into the residuary clause of the Will. Thomas Gibney was the residuary beneficiary of the Will and he therefore was entitled to the devise. Heather left cash assets to her 85 year-old mother, Ethel Wyman, “if she survives me”. Ethel died before Everett began this week with seven games left on the regular season schedule. They went up against Lowell (Oct. 15) and Arlington (Oct. 16), a couple of non-league teams, after press deadline, before hosting nonleague Hamilton-Wenham at 7-Acres later today (Oct. 18), beginning at 4 p.m. Volleyball The volleyball team (5-9) lost two out of three games last week. They dropped games to Lynn Classical (3-0, Oct. 7) and non-league Lawrence (3-1, Oct. 11). Between those two defeats, the Tide topped Lynn English, 3-1, on Oct. 9. The Everett girls started this week with six more matches left on the regular season schedule. They were at Somerville (Oct. 15) and Medford (Oct. 16), after press deadline, before coming home to host non-league Lowell later today (Oct. 18), starting at 5:30 p.m. Heather. Heather’s brother John Hossack filed the action in court claiming that he should have received the cash assets as a lineal descendant of his mother Ethel Wyman. The SJC found that the devise of the cash assets to Ethel Wyman lapsed and the cash assets fell into the residuary estate thereby rightfully belonging to Thomas Gibney. He was a caretaker neighbor of Heather and her health care agent. The SJC found that Heather Hossack intended to avoid the anti-lapse statute by including the words “if she survives me”. A devise, other than a residuary devise, that fails for any reason becomes part of the residuary estate. When a Will imposes no survivorship condition or alternate disposition on a devise if the devisee predeceases the testator, there is no indication in the terms of the Will that the testator contemplated the possibility that the devisee might predecease her. As such, the anti-lapse statute fills in the testator’s missing intent with a presumption against disinheritance of certain lineal descendants, allowing the devisee’s living issue (i.e. children or grandchildren) to take in the devisee’s stead. Courts will always review the Will as a whole in order to determine the testator’s intent. That is precisely how the SJC decided this very important case. Joseph D. Cataldo is an estate planning/elder law attorney, Certified Public Accountant, Certified Financial Planner, AICPA Personal Financial Specialist and holds a masters degree in taxation.
19 Publizr Home