Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews opioid remediation report, approves $2.1M option and requests metrics update
Summary
The committee reviewed a legislative analyst report on uses of opioid settlement funds, voted to pursue the smaller, disability‑led contract option (total $2.1 million), and added a requirement that staff report program metrics before finalizing an RFP.
A City Council committee reviewed a report from the Office of the Legislative Analyst (CLA) on potential uses of opioid settlement funds and voted to approve the report’s recommendations with an amendment requiring follow‑up metrics reporting.
The committee instructed staff to note the CLA report, direct the mayor’s office and relevant departments to pursue reimbursement strategies, and asked the CLA to return in 90 days with progress on city–county collaboration to create a harm‑reduction center. The committee chose the smaller contract option (option B) and asked for program metrics before finalizing a request for proposals (RFP).
Chris Espinoza of the Office of the Legislative Analyst presented the report and outlined two contracting approaches. Option A proposed issuing seven regionally based contracts at $500,000 each (total $3.5 million). Option B proposed seven smaller contracts at $300,000 each (total $2.1 million). Espinoza described likely allowable activities for opioid settlement funds, including street‑medicine models, overdose prevention and education, syringe access, wound care and linkage to medication‑assisted treatment; he flagged uncertainty about which expenses would be reimbursable by state or federal sources.
Councilmembers pressed staff on reimbursement prospects and administrative burden. Espinoza said that some programs (for example, the street‑medicine pilot tied to Medicaid billing) can produce receipts and claims for reimbursement, but that the city lacks complete data on current county services and market saturation in each region. "We want to save every dollar we can, but we don't want to burden departments with administrative work they cannot carry," he said.
A councilmember moved and the committee approved recommendations 1–3 from the CLA report, plus option B (the seven $300,000 contracts), and an amendment asking the CLA and the mayor’s office to present program metrics and spending outcomes prior to finalizing the RFP. The clerk recorded Councilmember Raman, Councilmember Jurado and Councilmember Brumanos voting yes; Councilmember Bloomfield was absent.
The committee directed staff to structure the RFP for rapid implementation while maintaining options for more comprehensive city–county programs in the future.
