"The impetus of this opioid settlement money is to spend on innovative ways to not let this happen again," states public health policy analyst Tricia Christensen, highlighting the critical debate over how funds intended to combat the opioid crisis are being utilized by Louisiana sheriffs. A collaborative investigation reveals a stark contrast between intended uses and actual expenditures, raising questions about accountability and effectiveness.
In a groundbreaking collaboration, KFF Health News joined forces with three Louisiana news organizations – The Current, Gulf States Newsroom, and Verite News – to scrutinize the allocation of opioid settlement funds by all 64 sheriffs across the state. This extensive investigation, spanning five months and involving numerous public records requests, has produced the first comprehensive accounting of how millions of dollars, earmarked to address the devastating opioid epidemic, are being spent. While every state receives payouts from legal settlements with companies accused of fueling the crisis, Louisiana stands out for dedicating an unprecedented 20% of these funds directly to its sheriffs, the largest such allocation for law enforcement nationwide. This unique structure, combined with the independent budgetary authority and lack of proactive public reporting requirements for Louisiana’s elected sheriffs, has made tracking these significant financial inflows a challenge for the average citizen. Many view these settlement dollars as "blood money," believing they should be exclusively directed toward addiction abatement and recovery efforts, rather than diverted to other purposes.
The opioid crisis, a relentless public health emergency, has resulted in profound loss across the United States. Since 2000, over one million lives have been tragically cut short by drug overdoses, with prescription painkillers playing a significant role in initiating many addiction journeys. In response, numerous legal actions have led to substantial settlement payouts from pharmaceutical companies and distributors implicated in the crisis. Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of OxyContin, finalized its $7.4 billion bankruptcy this year, and various other settlements are expected to continue distributing funds for more than a decade. This influx of capital has been widely perceived as a "pot of gold," attracting the attention of various government agencies and sectors vying for resources.
Law enforcement agencies, including sheriff’s offices, argue that their efforts in drug interdiction and arrests are vital to saving lives, but these operations come with substantial costs that strain their budgets. However, this perspective is met with staunch opposition from many recovery advocates who argue that channeling opioid settlement funds into what they perceive as the "failed war on drugs" undermines the core intent of the settlements. The lack of stringent oversight on how these funds are dispersed often leaves the allocation decisions to the discretion of local politicians and community members, reflecting their diverse views on addiction and effective intervention strategies. Louisiana’s approach, by directing a significant portion of these funds directly to sheriffs, presents a unique case study in how these differing priorities manifest when law enforcement leaders have direct control over substantial settlement resources.
The state of Louisiana’s agreements with parishes and sheriffs regarding settlement cash include broad categories for "law enforcement expenditures relating to the opioid epidemic." However, according to addiction and public health experts, even if these expenditures are legally permissible, they may not be appropriate or effective in addressing the root causes and consequences of the crisis. Danny Bolner Jr., a Jefferson Parish resident with over two decades of recovery from addiction, who lost his 28-year-old son to a fentanyl overdose in 2016, voiced his concerns. Representing families who have lost loved ones, Bolner believes that resources are being directed "to all the wrong places." Purchases such as drones and vehicles, in his view, detract from the critical need for programs focused on youth education, job training for individuals in recovery, and the distribution of overdose reversal medications like Narcan. He emphasizes that this "money is what we have to save lives," and its diversion to other purposes could deplete a finite resource that is desperately needed for direct intervention.
Tricia Christensen, a public health policy analyst and a national expert on opioid settlements, who served as a member of the review panel for this investigation, noted that the core principle guiding the assessment of expenditures is whether they facilitate arrests or prevent overdoses. She argues that the "impetus of this opioid settlement money is to spend on innovative ways to not let this happen again," referring to the devastating overdose crisis. Christensen suggests that sheriffs should be inquiring, "How could we use this to reinvest in the community, not just build up our office?" Many of the equipment purchases made by sheriffs did not align with this philosophy. For instance, the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office acquired a safe for evidence storage related to opioid investigations and a scanner for their traffic division to detect narcotics concealed in vehicles. 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 nationwide with law enforcement agencies. The Bossier Parish Sheriff’s Office invested in 130 body cameras and 50 dash cameras. Christensen and other reviewers pointed out that sheriffs already receive taxpayer dollars and federal grants for such law enforcement equipment. They contend that opioid settlement funds, which are finite and designated for a specific purpose, should not be diverted for these routine operational costs, a practice that is explicitly prohibited in some states.
Kevin Cobb, executive director of the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association, countered that existing taxpayer funding may not adequately cover all the needs of sheriffs’ offices, stating, "Our budgets are overloaded." Casey Rayborn Hicks, a spokesperson for the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office, explained that complex investigations aimed at dismantling drug trafficking syndicates necessitate advanced equipment. She argued that while treatment and recovery services are crucial, they address the consequences of addiction after drugs have entered the community. Law enforcement, she stated, has an equally essential role in preventing these deadly substances from reaching potential victims. First Lt. Blake Tabor, a spokesperson for the Terrebonne Sheriff’s Office, echoed this sentiment, emphasizing their primary focus on disrupting the criminal activity that fuels addiction. He asserted that this law enforcement effort complements the work of other entities in prevention, treatment, and recovery. The Bossier Parish Sheriff’s Office declined to comment on their spending.
Amidst these differing perspectives, some sheriffs have demonstrably prioritized public health initiatives. Acadia Parish Sheriff K.P. Gibson has directed all his settlement funds toward providing in-jail treatment for individuals with opioid use disorder, with the goal of breaking cycles of addiction and crime and enabling productive reintegration into society. Research consistently demonstrates that providing medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) within correctional facilities significantly reduces recidivism rates and overdose deaths. In St. Martin Parish, settlement funds have supported a specialized team of officers dedicated to connecting individuals with substance use disorders or co-occurring mental health conditions to treatment. This team also coordinates support services for family members and assists with navigating the complexities of paying for care. Chester Cedars, chief legal counsel for the St. Martin Parish Sheriff’s Office, described their role as a "broker" between those in need and service providers, acknowledging that while officers are not clinicians, they play a vital role in facilitating access to care.
Dr. Stephen Loyd, an addiction medicine doctor and the West Virginia drug czar, who served as the third member of the review panel, praised the comprehensive nature of the St. Martin Parish program, recognizing addiction as a "family issue" where every crisis can have far-reaching consequences. The alignment of these initiatives with the recommendations of the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force is notable. Cedars, the former chair of the task force, and Gibson, its current chair, have been instrumental in guiding the state’s approach to settlement fund utilization. Cedars explicitly stated that the St. Martin Sheriff’s Office is not allocating any funds to enforcement activities, asserting that such use is contrary to the settlement’s intent. While Gibson acknowledged the broad legal guidelines for spending and expressed reluctance to criticize other sheriffs, he has advised numerous colleagues seeking guidance.
However, the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force currently lacks the authority to enforce its recommendations, as highlighted in a 2025 report by the Louisiana Legislative Auditor. The report indicated that state lawmakers would need to enact new legislation to establish stronger oversight mechanisms for opioid settlement funds. In response, the Louisiana state legislature passed a resolution in May, tasking the legislative auditor with reviewing how all parishes and sheriffs are managing their opioid settlement money, with a report due prior to the 2027 legislative session. State Sen. Brach Myers, a co-author of the resolution, stated that the objective is to gain clarity on fund allocation, identify any jurisdictions that are not spending their allocations, and determine the effectiveness of funded programs. This information, he believes, could pave the way for new legislation to "tighten up how funding is spent."
The Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force is actively pursuing enhanced oversight. Curtis Nelson, executive counsel for the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Administration Corporation, which supports the task force, revealed plans to contract with accounting firms for ongoing forensic audits of parishes and sheriffs. The aim is to audit 10 to 15 entities annually, prioritizing those receiving the largest sums. If audits uncover misuse of funds, the task force may have the option to withhold future payments. Nelson also indicated that the task force is considering the creation of an "unallowable list," similar to those implemented in other states, which would explicitly prohibit certain expenditures. Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry and Attorney General Liz Murrill did not respond to inquiries regarding their support for an unallowable list or other measures to address opioid settlement spending. Nevertheless, advocates like Danny Bolner Jr. are hopeful that such a list could effectively curb expenditures they deem inappropriate. "You’re keeping them on the track when you tell them what they can’t use it for," Bolner stated.
While awaiting stronger oversight, Bolner continues his tireless advocacy, distributing overdose reversal medications, participating in grief support groups, and raising awareness about addiction in his community. He remains committed to engaging with sheriffs and parishes to advocate for what he considers the most effective use of settlement funds. His personal mission is clear: "If I save one life, it’s accomplished."
Methodology:
Reporters from KFF Health News, The Current, Gulf States Newsroom, and Verite News collaborated to contact all 64 Louisiana sheriff’s offices between March and July, seeking information on their opioid settlement fund expenditures. Offices that did not respond or provide specific financial details were marked as "Did not provide expenditures." All other responses were compiled into a data table. Data on settlement amounts allocated to each sheriff’s office through 2025 was obtained from the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force’s public spreadsheet, summing allocations for years 1 through 5 (2021-2025). In instances where sheriff’s offices reported spending more than allocated, it was often due to the combination of sheriff and parish government funds or funds from other sources, or the inclusion of 2026 allocations.
The collected data was analyzed by reporters using two primary methods. First, an unduplicated list of expenditures was created, with sheriff’s office names removed. This list was then reviewed by three experts: Tricia Christensen, a public health policy expert; Dr. Stephen Loyd, an addiction medicine physician and former chair of Tennessee’s Opioid Abatement Council; and Danny Bolner Jr., an individual in recovery who lost his son to overdose. Each reviewer voted on whether each expenditure was an appropriate or inappropriate use of opioid settlement money. The majority vote determined the final classification. The percentage of expenditures deemed inappropriate by the panel was calculated for each sheriff’s office. Second, KFF Health News analyzed the expenditures against the "unallowable lists" established by six states (California, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, South Carolina, and Virginia). The percentage of expenditures that would be considered unallowable or not recommended in these states was calculated for each Louisiana sheriff’s office.
