In the wake of the opioid crisis, funds from settlement agreements are being distributed across various counties and cities. However, the allocation of these resources has sparked a debate over their intended use. While some argue for a focus on prevention and treatment, others are channeling funds into law enforcement initiatives.
Law Enforcement Allocations
The City of Beatrice stands out with its decision to allocate nearly $3,000 from opioid settlement funds toward SWAT training and related travel expenses for police officers in 2025. Police Chief Jay Murphy justified this use by stating that the training addresses the dangers associated with drugs during search warrants and raids.
With over $95,000 in settlement funds received, Beatrice is still contemplating the best use for the remaining balance. Other agencies are also channeling these funds into law enforcement needs. For example, Dakota County invested $11,500 in K-9 units with an additional $2,000 from a foundation, while Thurston County spent around $21,000 on a K-9 and associated costs.
Behavioral Health Region 4 also directed $10,000 to the Madison County sheriff for a K-9, highlighting a pattern of using settlement funds for law enforcement. However, this allocation has raised questions about compliance with settlement guidelines.
Controversial Spending
Patrick Habecker, a professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Rural Drug Addiction Research Center, expressed skepticism about the alignment between these law enforcement expenditures and the original intent of the funds, which is to assist those affected by opioids. Similarly, in other states, there are instances of counties and sheriffs using funds for surveillance technologies and K-9s, which some argue diverge from the spirit of the agreement.
Louisiana, for instance, allocates 20% of its settlement funds to county sheriffs, resulting in a wide range of expenditures from treatment in jails to law enforcement equipment. In Nebraska, smaller sums have been spent on equipment like THC detection pouches and gas mask holsters, as well as a Zoom Workplace Pro subscription for the probation office.
Public Health vs. Law Enforcement
Michelle Varisco, an opioid use disorder researcher at the University of Texas, criticized the use of funds for law enforcement, arguing that they should support public health initiatives. She noted that decision-makers often lack expertise in public health or addiction, leading to a preference for law enforcement approaches.
Varisco compared this situation to tobacco settlements in the ’80s and ’90s, where funds were similarly distributed and often misused by local governments. She emphasized the importance of transparency in funding decisions to prevent further opioid-related deaths, citing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s estimate of over 800,000 opioid overdose deaths in the U.S. from 1999 to 2023.
“We shouldn’t have to do open records requests to find out how billions of dollars in opioid settlement funds are being dispersed and allocated and used … because these dollars are really owed to the families that have lost loved ones due to the opioid crisis,” Varisco stated. “And they deserve to know where the money is being spent and they deserve to provide feedback on how it is being used.”
The Flatwater Free Press is Nebraska’s first independent, nonprofit newsroom focused on investigations and feature stories that matter.
