Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates using opioid settlement funds for treatment space rather than advertising
Summary
Board members discussed using opioid settlement money to build treatment or therapy space at the prison—citing Schuylkill County’s example—instead of spending heavily on public-service advertising; members said they want long‑lasting programs and physical space for treatment.
Board members raised the possibility of using opioid settlement funds for a physical addition or dedicated treatment space at the prison to support addiction and co‑occurring mental‑health services. One board member said Schuylkill County had used settlement funds to add treatment space and urged the county to pursue a similar path rather than spending heavily on public advertising: “Spending $400,000 on a commercial is ridiculous,” the speaker said, adding that a facility addition financed from settlement funds could provide longer‑term treatment capacity.
Members argued for a dual‑diagnosis approach—treatment that addresses both opioid use and mental‑health needs—and said programming should begin immediately upon incarceration rather than waiting until release. The board noted the opioid settlement trust has review criteria and that application guidance can help shape proposals. Several members said the grant writer is preparing narrative material for a possible application.
No formal action or allocation was recorded; the discussion concluded with encouragement to pursue program concepts and to work with the opioid settlement trust’s review process.
Clarifying details: speaker referenced Schuylkill County’s facility expansion paid largely with opioid settlement funds and noted the prison population and services. No dollar amount for a local facility addition was agreed on; the meeting included a critical remark that the county’s existing advertising contract costs (cited by a board member as $400,000) should be weighed against capital priorities.
