Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Davis County attorney urges using $7 million in opioid‑settlement funds for local programs, calls 2023 statute an overreach
Summary
County Attorney Troy Rollins urged commissioners to place roughly $7 million in opioid‑settlement funds into the general fund for allocation to sheriff, county attorney, public defenders, pretrial services and behavioral health, calling a 2023 state statute that restricts spending an unconstitutional interference; commissioners agreed to fold decisions into the budget process and have staff produce detailed, statute‑compliant proposals.
County Attorney Troy Rollins told Davis County commissioners on Aug. 26 that about $7 million in opioid‑settlement money is currently unusable unless the county repackages spending to meet a 2023 state statute’s requirements, and he urged commissioners to move the funds into the county general fund so they can be allocated to allowable local uses.
“$7,000,000 sits in there while we’ve got the budget situation that we’ve got,” Rollins said, arguing the statute interferes with Davis County’s separate settlement agreements and describing the restriction as an “unconstitutional, unlawful interference.” He told the commission the county can justify expenditures under the settlement agreement across eight allowable categories and recommended allocating funds to the sheriff’s office, county attorney’s office, public defenders, pretrial services and Davis Behavioral Health.
Rollins and staff described concrete proposals they are developing to comply both with the settlement agreement and the statute, including creating a rehabilitation services division in the county attorney’s office, appointing a new division chief, expanding specialty courts and funding forensic social workers to provide warm handoffs from the jail to treatment. Staff also cited proposed equipment and supplies such as a $200,000 body scanner for corrections to detect concealed drugs and about $25,000 of naloxone for correctional facilities.
Commissioners and staff debated risk tolerance: several favored moving forward with programmatic expenditures that clearly exceed baseline costs, while others urged caution and compliance with the statute to avoid litigation or audit exposure. Rollins said the attorney‑general’s office has expressed some sympathy for the county’s legal position but that legislative and statutory constraints remain in place.
There was no final allocation vote. Commissioners asked county staff to meet individually with each commissioner during the budget kickoff to refine proposals and return with itemized, statute‑compliant plans for formal consideration in the budget process.
