"This is blood money," said Danny Bolner Jr., a Jefferson Parish resident who has been in recovery from addiction for more than two decades and lost his 28-year-old son to a fentanyl overdose in 2016. "It can’t make up for the lives lost, but we do want to make sure that it’s going to count."
This sentiment encapsulates the growing concern over how opioid settlement funds, intended to address the devastating opioid crisis, are being allocated in Louisiana. While every state is receiving payouts from settlements with pharmaceutical companies accused of fueling overdose deaths, Louisiana stands out by directing a significant portion of these funds to its sheriffs. This unique allocation, the largest for law enforcement nationwide, has sparked debate and scrutiny, as reporting reveals sheriffs are using substantial sums for equipment and technology rather than the addiction prevention, treatment, and recovery services that many believe the funds were intended for.
A Deep Dive into Louisiana’s Opioid Settlement Spending by Sheriffs
In a collaborative effort, KFF Health News partnered with three Louisiana news organizations—The Current, Gulf States Newsroom, and Verite News—to investigate the spending of opioid settlement funds by all 64 sheriffs across the state. This comprehensive investigation, spanning five months and involving numerous public records requests, has produced the first detailed accounting of how millions of dollars are being utilized. The findings reveal a significant divergence in priorities, with many sheriffs opting for law enforcement tools over direct addiction mitigation programs, a decision that has drawn criticism from public health advocates and families who have lost loved ones to the opioid epidemic.
Opioid settlement funds, totaling billions nationwide, stem from legal actions against companies accused of aggressively marketing prescription painkillers and contributing to an unprecedented surge in overdose deaths. While the stated purpose of these funds is to abate the addiction crisis, the allocation in Louisiana presents a unique case study. Sheriffs in the state are independently elected officials with their own budgets, not beholden to other local authorities. Crucially, they are not mandated to publicly report their expenditures of these settlement funds, making transparency a significant challenge for the average citizen. Without proactive reporting or diligent public records requests, tracking this "windfall," often referred to as "blood money" by those directly impacted by the crisis, has been difficult. Many believe these funds should be exclusively dedicated to combating addiction, recognizing the profound human cost of the opioid epidemic.
The nationwide debate surrounding the use of opioid settlement money by law enforcement agencies has intensified since funds began flowing significantly in 2022. Settlements, such as the $7.4 billion bankruptcy resolution by Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, are projected to continue paying out for over a decade. This influx of capital has been viewed as a "pot of gold" by various entities, including law enforcement agencies. These agencies argue that their role in seizing drugs and apprehending dealers is vital to saving lives, but such operations incur substantial costs, and the addiction crisis has strained their budgets. However, recovery advocates strongly oppose any allocation of opioid funds to what they perceive as the "failed war on drugs," advocating instead for investments in prevention, treatment, and harm reduction strategies.
The lack of stringent regulations on how these funds are spent often leaves decisions to the discretion of local officials and the prevailing community views on addiction and effective intervention strategies. Louisiana’s unique approach, channeling a substantial portion of settlement funds directly to sheriffs, provides a critical real-world experiment to observe how these differing priorities manifest. The state’s agreements with parishes and sheriffs outline broad categories for "allowable spending," including "law enforcement expenditures relating to the opioid epidemic." However, legal compliance does not always equate to appropriateness or efficacy, according to addiction and public health experts.
Danny Bolner Jr., a Jefferson Parish resident with over two decades of recovery from addiction, shared his profound disappointment with the spending decisions. Having lost his 28-year-old son to a fentanyl overdose in 2016, Bolner represented the perspective of families affected by the crisis on a review panel examining these expenditures. He expressed dismay at purchases like drones and vehicles, arguing that the funds would be far better utilized in programs focused on youth emotional education, job training for individuals in recovery, and the distribution of overdose reversal medications like naloxone. "This money is what we have to save lives," Bolner stated, emphasizing that diverting these finite resources to other purposes diminishes their potential impact.
Tricia Christensen, a public health policy analyst and national expert on opioid settlements, served on the review panel. She emphasized that the core purpose of these funds is to support innovative approaches to prevent future tragedies, referencing the more than one million lives lost to the overdose crisis since 2000. Christensen advocates for sheriffs to consider how these funds can "reinvest in the community, not just build up our office." Many of the equipment purchases reviewed did not meet this standard.
Examples of expenditures that raised concerns include the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office purchasing a safe for evidence storage related to opioid investigations and a scanner for their traffic division to detect narcotics in hidden compartments. The Terrebonne Parish Sheriff’s Office allocated $465,000 for Flock cameras, automated license plate readers that collect data on passing vehicles and share it nationally with law enforcement. Similarly, the Bossier Parish Sheriff’s Office acquired 130 body cameras and 50 dash cameras. Christensen and other reviewers pointed out that sheriffs already receive taxpayer funds and federal grants for such law enforcement equipment. They argue that opioid settlement funds, being finite and specifically earmarked, should not be diverted for these purposes, a practice already restricted in some states.
Kevin Cobb, executive director of the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association, defended the sheriffs’ needs, stating that their budgets are often "overloaded." He argued that complex investigations into drug trafficking syndicates necessitate advanced equipment. Casey Rayborn Hicks, a spokesperson for the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office, elaborated that while treatment and recovery services are crucial, they address the consequences of addiction after drugs have already entered the community. Law enforcement, she stated, has a parallel and equally essential responsibility to prevent these deadly substances from reaching potential victims. First Lt. Blake Tabor, a spokesperson for the Terrebonne Sheriff’s Office, echoed this sentiment, asserting that their primary focus is disrupting the criminal activity that fuels addiction, a role that complements other entities’ efforts in prevention, treatment, and recovery. The Bossier Parish Sheriff’s Office declined to comment on their spending.
Divergent Paths: Public Health vs. Public Safety
While many sheriffs have directed funds towards law enforcement tools, some have prioritized public health initiatives. Acadia Parish Sheriff K.P. Gibson has dedicated all his settlement funds to providing treatment within the jail, aiming to break cycles of addiction and crime. "I want people back into society, being productive," Gibson stated. Research consistently demonstrates that providing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in correctional facilities significantly reduces recidivism and overdose deaths.
In St. Martin Parish, settlement funds facilitated the creation of a specialized team of officers dedicated to connecting individuals with substance use disorders or co-occurring mental health issues to treatment services. Chester Cedars, chief legal counsel for the St. Martin Parish Sheriff’s Office, explained that officers also help coordinate support services for families and assist with navigating the complexities of paying for care. Cedars clarified that while the officers are not clinicians, they serve as vital "brokers" between those needing services and the providers.
Dr. Stephen Loyd, an addiction medicine doctor and West Virginia’s drug czar, who was the third reviewer on the panel, lauded the comprehensive nature of the St. Martin Parish program. He described addiction as a "family issue," noting that every crisis call represents a potential family emergency.
The exemplary efforts in Acadia and St. Martin parishes are not coincidental. Sheriff Gibson currently chairs the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force, and Cedars is its former chair. This task force is intended to guide the state’s approach to prioritizing settlement funds. Cedars explicitly stated that the St. Martin Sheriff’s Office is not using "one penny for any enforcement activity," as that contradicts the intended purpose of the settlement. Gibson, while acknowledging the broad legal guidelines for spending, expressed a reluctance to criticize other sheriffs’ choices. He has offered guidance to approximately a dozen sheriffs but recognizes that his advice is not binding.
A 2025 report by the Louisiana Legislative Auditor highlighted that the Opioid Abatement Task Force lacks the authority to enforce its recommendations. Sheriff Gibson indicated that state lawmakers would need to enact new legislation to establish stronger oversight on how opioid funds are utilized.
The Push for Increased Oversight
In response to these concerns, the Louisiana state legislature passed a resolution in May calling for the legislative auditor to review how all parishes and sheriffs are managing their opioid settlement funds. State Sen. Brach Myers, a Republican and co-author of the resolution, aims to illuminate the flow of these dollars, assess whether jurisdictions are spending them effectively, and identify successful programs. This information, Myers believes, could pave the way for introducing legislation to "tighten up how funding is spent."
Concurrently, the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force is actively working to enhance its oversight mechanisms. Curtis Nelson, executive counsel for the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Administration Corporation, which supports the task force, confirmed that they are seeking proposals from accounting firms to conduct ongoing forensic audits of parishes and sheriffs. The objective is to audit 10 to 15 entities annually, prioritizing those receiving the largest allocations. Should audits reveal misuse of funds, the task force could potentially withhold future payments. The task force is also exploring the creation of an "unallowable list," similar to those implemented in other states, which would explicitly prohibit certain types of spending.
Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry and Attorney General Liz Murrill did not respond to inquiries regarding their stance on an unallowable list or other potential actions to address opioid settlement spending. Nevertheless, many advocates express hope that such a list could curb expenditures they deem inappropriate. "You’re keeping them on the track when you tell them what they can’t use it for," stated Danny Bolner Jr., who continues his advocacy work by distributing overdose reversal medications, participating in grief support groups, and raising awareness about addiction. He remains committed to engaging with sheriffs and parishes about what he considers the most effective uses of settlement funds, believing that even saving one life makes the effort worthwhile.
Methodology
Reporters from KFF Health News, The Current, Gulf States Newsroom, and Verite News collaborated to contact all 64 sheriff’s offices in Louisiana, inquiring about their expenditures of opioid settlement funds. This extensive outreach involved numerous emails and phone calls between March and July. Sheriff’s offices that did not respond or provide specific dollar amounts for programs and services were marked as "Did not provide expenditures." All other responses were compiled into a comprehensive data table.
Information regarding the total settlement funds allocated to each sheriff’s office through 2025 was obtained from a public spreadsheet maintained by the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force. Allocations for years 1 through 5, representing 2021 through 2025, were summed to provide a total projection. In instances where a sheriff’s office reported spending more than their allocated amount, it was often due to the combination of their share of opioid settlement dollars with funds from the parish government or other sources. Some sheriffs may have also reported expenditures from their 2026 allocation.
The collected data was analyzed using two primary methods. First, an unduplicated list of expenditures was created and de-identified by removing the names of the sheriff’s offices. This anonymized list was then reviewed by three experts: Tricia Christensen, a public health policy expert tracking opioid settlement spending since 2022; Dr. Stephen Loyd, an addiction medicine physician and individual in recovery, who previously chaired Tennessee’s Opioid Abatement Council and currently serves as West Virginia’s drug czar; and Danny Bolner Jr., an individual in recovery who lost his son to a fentanyl overdose and is raising his son’s daughter in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana. Each reviewer voted on whether each expenditure description constituted an appropriate or inappropriate use of opioid settlement money. The majority vote determined the final classification. This analysis allowed for the calculation of the percentage of expenditures deemed inappropriate by the panel for each sheriff’s office.
The second analytical approach involved comparing Louisiana’s spending patterns to lists of "unallowable expenses" established in six other states: California, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, South Carolina, and Virginia. KFF Health News calculated the amount of money spent by each Louisiana sheriff’s office on expenditures that would be deemed unallowable or not recommended in one or more of these states. This value was then divided by the total amount spent to determine the percentage of expenditures that would have been restricted in other jurisdictions.
The Current’s Alena Maschke, Gulf States Newsroom’s Drew Hawkins, and Verite News’ Katie Jane Fernelius contributed to the database featured in this article.
