Citizen Portal
Sign In

Clark County officials form committee to review opioid abatement requests; recovery groups seek support

5093762 · June 27, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The court discussed forming an opioid-abatement review committee, heard updates on Recovery Ready certification and a proposed peer-support position for a recovery community center, and reviewed the county’s opioid fund balance.

Magistrates agreed to form a review committee for opioid abatement disbursements and discussed using experienced community-fund members to vet applications before the fiscal court acts.

Court members said they would assign three magistrates rotating off a separate community fund to the opioid-abatement review group so the panel could examine applications and make recommendations to the fiscal court for final approval. A magistrate asked county staff to formalize appointment procedures for the committee and confirm meeting timelines.

Separately, county recovery partners gave updates. Cody Angel, vice chair of the Clark County ASAP board (Agency for Substance Abuse Policy), said Winchester will receive an on-site Recovery Ready certification visit on July 23 and invited county officials to attend. Angel said the local coalition has organized stigma training and other steps to strengthen support services.

A recovery organization presented a formal proposal — using the Kentucky Association of Counties (KACO) template — for a peer-support staff position at a recovery community center. The proposal included a detailed budget narrative and addressed insurance and credentialing questions raised by magistrates. The presenters asked the court to appoint a small committee to review the proposal and recommend whether to fund the position from opioid-abatement proceeds.

A magistrate noted the county’s opioid-abatement fund balance exceeds $700,000 and suggested the review committee consider longer-term investment or interest-bearing options to preserve principal while evaluating grant requests. The court asked the county finance director to return with options on fund management and disbursement rules at a future meeting.