Citizen Portal
Sign In

Officials outline prevention fund revenue and propose $5 million for regional prevention leads

Appropriations · April 7, 2026

Loading...

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

State health officials told the committee the substance‑misuse prevention special fund is fed by cannabis excise tax revenue ("30% or up to 10,000,000") and that the administration proposes $5,000,000 for regional prevention lead organizations, including $1.5 million for staffing and $3.0 million for school programming.

Megan Hoch, the department’s financial director, told the committee the substance‑misuse prevention special fund is a recent creation designed to be supported by cannabis excise tax revenue: "30% or up to 10,000,000 of the cannabis excise tax is what's flowing and feeding this subsidy," she said, adding that the FY26 estimate passed in the budget was $6,750,000.

Emily Trigger, division director for the health department’s division of substance use programs, said the administration’s FY27 revenue estimate for the fund is roughly $9,500,000 and that the department prioritized three areas in its request: regional prevention lead organizations, school‑based prevention programming and field‑based staff. "Our proposed budget for f 1.7 is 5,000,000," she told the committee, describing a proposed breakout that includes about $1,500,000 for staffing and $3,000,000 for school initiatives.

Trigger outlined how the prevention lead organization model works: four regional prevention lead organizations conduct regional needs assessments, develop five‑year strategic plans, run competitive RFPs and serve as fiscal agents for subgrants to local partners. She said the program has grown to about 64 subgrantee partners statewide and that allocations are a mix of a base infrastructure amount plus additional funds distributed by catchment population.

Committee members asked whether recovery centers or recovery residences could be supported through the prevention lead organization process; Trigger said the prevention fund is focused on population‑level prevention and that recovery center operating support is funded through other sources. Hoch and Trigger also listed other funding sources that support recovery services, including a general‑fund investment for recovery centers (approximately $3,860,000 this year), a State Opioid Response federal grant (about $2,100,000) and settlement funds used to support recovery coaching for justice‑involved individuals.

The committee signaled it appreciated the clarification and said Senate Health and Welfare is working to articulate programmatic criteria where statute is silent. The presentation concluded with committee members thanking staff for the information and moving on to the next agenda items.