Commissioners preview recommended allocations for alcohol-tax and opioid‑settlement funds

Board of County Commissioners of Johnson County · December 5, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

United Community Services presented recommendations to allocate $243,000 in alcohol‑tax funds and $100,000 in opioid‑settlement funds for 2026 programs; USC said it reviewed 22 applications and recommended awards across school districts, county organizations and nonprofits, with program-level details in the 30‑plus page report.

Susan Meyer of the county manager’s office introduced United Community Services’ (USC) recommendations for distribution of 2026 alcohol-tax funds and opioid‑settlement funds. Erica Garcia Reyes of USC summarized the funds’ purposes, the review process and the recommended allocations.

Garcia Reyes explained the alcohol-tax revenue is derived from a state excise tax on liquor-by-the-drink and that statute requires a portion be spent on alcoholism and drug-abuse prevention and treatment. She said the opioid-settlement funds are distributed through the Kansas Attorney General’s Office to jurisdictions that joined the statewide settlement and are available for allocation through about 2040.

USC staff said they reviewed 22 applications for the substance‑use continuum-of-care funding, that seven programs would receive full requests, and that the funding gap for recommended requests was roughly $450,000. Garcia Reyes noted Blue Valley School District did not apply but reported a carryover balance of about $44,000 available for 2026. The recommendations package also included $170,600 for the 2026 human service fund as outlined in USC’s report.

Commissioners asked for additional time to review the briefing documents. Commissioner Ashcraft said he had only received the reports the day before and requested a pre-meeting visit; the chair agreed to accommodate requests for further review before the Dec. 11 action meeting.

Next steps: staff asked the board to approve the allocations at the Dec. 11 meeting; the full report contains line‑item recommendations and supporting data.