"The impetus of this opioid settlement money is to spend on innovative ways to not let this happen again." – Tricia Christensen, Public Health Policy Analyst
This statement encapsulates the central tension surrounding the allocation of millions in opioid settlement funds across Louisiana. While intended to address the devastating opioid crisis, a significant portion of these funds is being directed towards law enforcement expenditures, sparking debate among experts, advocates, and affected families about whether these investments truly serve the spirit of the settlements and offer the most effective path to mitigating addiction and saving lives.
KFF Health News, in collaboration with Louisiana news outlets The Current, Gulf States Newsroom, and Verite News, undertook a comprehensive investigation into how all 64 sheriffs in the state have utilized their share of opioid settlement funds. This collaborative effort, spanning five months and involving numerous public records requests, has produced the first detailed accounting of millions of dollars distributed to law enforcement agencies. While every state is receiving payouts from companies accused of fueling the overdose epidemic, Louisiana stands out for earmarking a substantial 20% of these funds to its sheriffs – the largest carve-out for law enforcement nationwide.
In Louisiana, sheriffs operate as independently elected officials with their own budgets, answerable to no other local authority. This autonomy, coupled with a lack of proactive public reporting requirements for their spending, has created a significant challenge for ordinary citizens seeking to track the flow of this substantial financial windfall. Many view these funds, often described as “blood money” by those who have lost loved ones to addiction, as exclusively designated for abating the addiction crisis. However, the reality of their allocation reveals a complex interplay between public health imperatives and law enforcement priorities.
The national conversation surrounding the use of opioid settlement money by law enforcement has been ongoing since the funds began to significantly flow in 2022. These settlements, stemming from legal actions against pharmaceutical companies like Purdue Pharma, maker of OxyContin, are projected to pay out for over a decade. The sheer volume of these funds has led to fierce competition for their allocation across various government agencies and private sectors, with law enforcement agencies arguing that their role in drug interdiction and dealer arrests is critical to saving lives, albeit costly. Conversely, many recovery advocates staunchly oppose any diversion of these funds towards what they perceive as the failed "war on drugs," advocating instead for investments in prevention, treatment, and recovery services.
The broad categories for allowable spending in Louisiana’s agreement with its parishes and sheriffs include "law enforcement expenditures relating to the opioid epidemic." While these expenditures may be legally permissible, addiction and public health experts question their appropriateness and efficacy. Danny Bolner Jr., a Jefferson Parish resident who has been in recovery for over two decades and lost his son to a fentanyl overdose, voiced strong concerns. Representing families affected by the crisis on a review panel, Bolner expressed dismay at expenditures such as the purchase of drones and vehicles, arguing that the funds would be better utilized in youth education programs, job training for those in recovery, and the distribution of overdose reversal medications. He emphasized that this finite pot of money is crucial for saving lives and that its diversion to other purposes diminishes its potential impact.
Tricia Christensen, a public health policy analyst and national expert on opioid settlements who served on the review panel, emphasized that the core intent of these funds is to support innovative solutions that prevent future tragedies. She suggested that sheriffs should prioritize reinvestment in the community rather than solely enhancing their own offices. Many of the equipment purchases reviewed by the panel did not align with this principle. For instance, the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office acquired a safe for evidence storage and a scanner for their traffic division to detect narcotics. Terrebonne Parish Sheriff’s Office allocated a significant $465,000 for Flock cameras, an automated license plate reader system, while Bossier Parish Sheriff’s Office invested in body and dash cameras. Christensen and other reviewers pointed out that law enforcement agencies already receive taxpayer funds and federal grants for such equipment, arguing that opioid settlement money, with its specific purpose and finite nature, should not be used for these expenditures. Some states, in fact, explicitly prohibit such uses.
Kevin Cobb, executive director of the Louisiana Sheriffs’ Association, countered that law enforcement budgets are often strained, and taxpayer money may not cover all necessary equipment for complex investigations. Casey Rayborn Hicks, spokesperson for the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office, stated that while treatment and recovery services are vital, law enforcement plays an equally essential role in preventing deadly drugs from entering communities in the first place. First Lt. Blake Tabor of the Terrebonne Parish Sheriff’s Office echoed this sentiment, asserting that their primary focus is disrupting the criminal activity that fuels addiction. The Bossier Parish Sheriff’s Office declined to comment on their spending.
However, not all sheriffs have directed their settlement funds towards enforcement. 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 and facilitate productive reintegration into society. Research strongly supports the efficacy of providing medications for opioid use disorder in correctional facilities, demonstrating reductions in recidivism and overdose deaths. In St. Martin Parish, settlement funds supported a specialized team of officers who connect individuals with substance use disorders to treatment and coordinate support services for families. Chester Cedars, chief legal counsel for the St. Martin Parish Sheriff’s Office, explained their role as a broker between those in need and service providers, acknowledging that while they are not clinicians, they play a crucial intermediary function.
Dr. Stephen Loyd, an addiction medicine doctor and the West Virginia drug czar, who also served on the review panel, lauded the comprehensive nature of the St. Martin Parish program, recognizing addiction as a multifaceted family issue. The parishes that received high marks from the reviewers, Acadia and St. Martin, are led by individuals who also hold key positions within the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force, the body intended to guide the use of settlement funds. Cedars explicitly stated that St. Martin Parish is not using any settlement money for enforcement activities, believing it contradicts the intended purpose of the funds. Sheriff Gibson, while acknowledging the broad legal guidelines, expressed that he is not in a position to criticize other sheriffs’ choices.
Despite Gibson’s advisory role to other sheriffs, a 2025 report by the Louisiana Legislative Auditor highlighted the task force’s lack of enforcement power, indicating that state lawmakers would need to enact new rules to establish stronger guardrails for opioid settlement spending. In response, the Louisiana legislature passed a resolution calling for a comprehensive review of 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, expressed the intent to use the findings to potentially introduce legislation to tighten spending regulations.
Meanwhile, 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, stated that the task force is seeking proposals from accounting firms to conduct ongoing forensic audits of parishes and sheriffs. The aim is to audit 10 to 15 entities annually, prioritizing those receiving the largest amounts, with the potential to withhold future payments from those found to be misusing funds. The task force is also exploring the creation of an "unallowable list," similar to those in other states, which would explicitly define prohibited expenditures.
While Governor Jeff Landry and Attorney General Liz Murrill did not respond to inquiries regarding their support for such measures, advocates like Danny Bolner Jr. express hope that an unallowable list could curb spending they deem inappropriate. Bolner continues his advocacy, distributing overdose reversal medications, participating in grief support groups, and raising awareness about addiction, while also engaging with sheriffs and parishes to advocate for what he believes is the most effective use of settlement funds. He remains committed to the belief that even saving a single life justifies the ongoing effort.
Methodology:
Reporters from KFF Health News, The Current, Gulf States Newsroom, and Verite News collaboratively contacted all 64 Louisiana sheriff’s offices between March and July to gather information on their opioid settlement fund expenditures. Offices that did not respond or provide specific financial details were marked as "Did not provide expenditures." The total settlement funds allocated to each sheriff’s office through 2025 were sourced from the Louisiana Opioid Abatement Task Force’s public spreadsheet, summing allocations from 2021 to 2025. In cases where reported spending exceeded allocations, it was often due to the combined use of sheriff and parish government funds or the inclusion of funds from the subsequent year’s allocation.
The collected expenditure data was de-identified and presented to three reviewers: 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 an overdose. Each reviewer voted on the appropriateness of each expenditure, with the majority decision determining its classification. The analysis calculated the percentage of expenditures deemed inappropriate by the panel for each sheriff’s office. Additionally, KFF Health News compared Louisiana’s sheriff expenditures against unallowable lists from six other states (California, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, South Carolina, and Virginia) to determine the percentage of spending that would be considered unallowable or not recommended in those jurisdictions.
