Caroline County staff outline options for roughly $3.1 million in opioid settlement funds, urge caution on recurring hires

Deputy county administrator Daniel Fox told the Caroline County Board of Commissioners on July 8 that the county has begun receiving opioid settlement payments and is working through how to allocate them under state guidance.

"Caroline, at this point, has received about $358,000" in local direct payments, Fox said, and the county has also received roughly $515,000 in target‑abatement grant allocations. He said an updated reporting template projects payments out to 2038 and that, combined, the direct and target funds for the county amount to approximately $3.1 million when extrapolated over the full projection period.

The state’s Office of Overdose Response has defined allowable uses in an "Exhibit E" attachment, Fox said: prevention, harm reduction, evidence‑based treatment, recovery services, and certain programs for people who intersect the criminal legal system. He said staff intend to work with departments — for example, the health department, corrections and the circuit court — to identify programs that match those categories and prepare applications or agreements that will meet state reporting requirements.

Several commissioners cautioned against using one‑time settlement money to create ongoing obligations. The board’s presiding commissioner said such funds "are 1 time settlement funds" and urged that any application or contract make clear that recurring costs would not be carried forward into the general fund. Another commissioner asked that applicants indicate how many individuals would be served, how the funds would be used to address the problem and what outcomes would be reported.

Fox said staff have already drafted an application form to collect the performance measures the state requires and will return with a prioritized list for the board to review. He also noted that smaller counties are being encouraged to consider joint applications with neighboring jurisdictions to reach scale where hiring a full‑time specialist would otherwise be difficult.

The board did not take formal action; commissioners directed staff to continue consultations with key partners (sheriff’s office, health department, and judiciary) and to invite departments to submit proposals that identify the problem, the population served, and measurable outcomes for reporting back to the state.

Next steps: staff will compile departmental requests and proposed agreements and return with recommended priorities and a reporting plan to satisfy the state's reporting template.