Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Abatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alexander County joins supplemental opioid manufacturer settlements; funds restricted to abatement activities
Summary
The board authorized county officials to sign supplemental agreements adding generic opioid manufacturers to statewide settlements expected to generate roughly $23 million in additional state funds, with 85 percent passed to local governments; funds must be used for opioid abatement and remediation.
Alexander County commissioners on Sept. 8 approved a resolution authorizing the county to join supplemental agreements that add generic opioid manufacturers to existing statewide settlements and to permit county officials to execute related documents.
County Attorney Ben Falconberry told the board the supplemental agreements expand prior settlements; the additional manufacturer settlements are expected to generate about $23 million to the state over time. Falconberry said under the settlement structure the state will retain 15 percent of those funds and allocate the remaining 85 percent to local governments, including Alexander County. He said the funds are restricted to approved opioid-abatement and remediation activities. The county already participates in an earlier Purdue/Sackler settlement through an agreement executed in February 2021.
Falconberry asked the board to authorize the county manager or the county attorney to sign the supplemental agreement and other related documents so Alexander County may receive its share of future distributions. He said the county would deposit opioid settlement dollars into the county’s existing special revenue fund established for those receipts and that there is no spending deadline under the settlement terms.
A motion to approve the resolution carried by unanimous raised‑hand vote. Falconberry said staff will continue to evaluate spending strategies to maximize abatement and remediation impact.
The resolution does not itself appropriate funds for any particular program; future allocations will be subject to county budgeting and any programmatic restrictions in the settlement agreement. Commissioners did not vote on any allocations at the Sept. 8 meeting.
