Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sedgwick County and Wichita establish Addiction Intervention Coalition to guide opioid-settlement spending
Summary
Commissioners approved a joint Wichita–Sedgwick County Addiction Intervention Coalition to review and recommend use of opioid settlement funds, creating an 11–15 member advisory body to shape RFPs, evaluate proposals and monitor programs. The motion passed 4–1 after debate on local control and speed of distribution.
A joint resolution to create the Wichita‑Sedgwick County Addiction Intervention Coalition passed the Board of County Commissioners on May 14 by a 4–1 roll call.
Armand Shkraf, assistant county counselor, told the commission the coalition’s purpose “is to evaluate and recommend effective allocation of the municipal fund and addiction fund settlement funds to local government as a result of Kansas’ Fight Addiction Act,” and to advise on RFPs and monitor programs receiving settlement money. County Counselor Justin Wagner said the coalition would work under state rules and an MOU with the Kansas Attorney General’s Office, and emphasized that the money must be spent in ways that comply with state law.
Commissioner Meitzner and others argued the advisory board model mirrors existing local processes used for liquor-tax or ARPA distributions and would bring technical expertise into decisions. Justin Wagner said legal counsel from both the county and city would advise the coalition.
Commissioner Howe dissented in part, saying he feared an extra advisory layer would slow direct grantmaking: “My opinion is this committee is unnecessary,” he said, arguing the county had staff and grant processes ready to deploy funds immediately. Chair Ryan Beatty and other supporters said the coalition would allow community experts to shape strategy and ensure accountability.
The commission also voted to approve a recommended slate of members (an 11‑member list that includes clinicians, treatment‑provider representatives, academic and law‑enforcement participants and one ex‑officio commissioner) to serve on the advisory group. The resolution requires bylaws and conflict‑of‑interest disclosures that, according to Shkraf, will prevent members from discussing or voting on matters where they have a conflict.
