Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Abatement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Superior Court accepted $100,250 opioid‑abatement grant to fund on-site lab and part‑time positions
Summary
The Newton County Board accepted a $100,250.15 grant from the Georgia Opioid Abatement Trust to establish an on-site instant lab and fund two part‑time collectors and a part‑time lab director for accountability courts; the board also approved creating the grant-funded positions.
The Newton County Board of Commissioners on May 19 accepted a $100,250.15 award from the Georgia Opioid Abatement Trust to support an on‑site instant laboratory system and related staff for the county’s accountability courts.
Judge Zahn, presenting the Superior Court request, said the grant covers equipment provided through a Council of Accountability Court Judges (CACJ) partnership and funds three part‑time positions: two collectors paid about $25 per hour and a part‑time lab director at roughly 29 hours per week. "Once it runs through, we actually get numbers, so it's more reliable," Judge Zahn said, describing the system as allowing quicker verification before sending samples for confirmation when necessary.
The court told the board there is no local match required for the award. Officials said the instant lab would reduce recurring costs for purchased testing cups and increase reliability of preliminary results; confirmation testing would still be done off‑site when disputed. Presenters also described plans to seek CACJ operating grant funds in future years if needed to sustain positions after the one‑time award expires.
Board members voted to accept the award and later approved an HR action to establish the grant‑funded positions so the lab can be staffed and brought into service.
The court said the program will serve participants from Newton County and neighboring Walton County where some participants travel to Newton for drug and accountability court services. Presenters noted the equipment comes through a vendor partnership with Thermo Fisher and that the court expects to continue pursuing grant sources for ongoing staffing costs if the one‑time award is not renewed.
The board action was limited to accepting the grant award and authorizing HR to create the positions; funding beyond the award was described as contingent on subsequent grant awards or other opioid‑related funding sources.
