Can I provide input on spending?

• 70% Montana Opioid Abatement Trust share:

  • 80% Abatement Regions sub-share: Up to each locality (not required). Most of the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust will be allocated by Abatement Regions and local governments, who must create their own governance structures for the administration and use of their funds and may each independently choose to seek public input on uses of their settlement funds, although this is not required.[1] For example, the Lewis & Clark Metro Region Opioid Governance Committee's[2] meeting agendas reserve space for public comment.[3] The Opioid Abatement Trust’s website includes contact information for some, but not all, Abatement Region governance officials; select each Abatement Region on this page for more information.

  • 20% Advisory Committee sub-share: No statewide opportunities available (not required). The Montana Opioid Abatement Advisory Committee has not established recurring opportunities for the public to provide input on uses of this sub-share.[4] Montana’s MOU requires the Advisory Committee to “develop written guidelines for receiving input from the State of Montana, Abatement Regions, Local Governments, and others regarding how the opioid crisis is affecting their jurisdictions or communities and their respective abatement needs.”[5] However, these guidelines either do not yet exist or have not been made publicly available.

    • Public comments at Trust meetings. The legal documents governing the Trust’s operations also require it to operate in a transparent manner, consistent with the standards that would apply if the Trust were a “public, governmental entity.”[6] However, it is unclear whether its Advisory Committee is subject to the state law requiring state “agencies” to include a public comment period on their meeting agendas,[7] and the Advisory Committee’s meeting agendas do not include dedicated public comment periods.[8]

• 15% state share: No opportunities available (not required). The state has not established recurring opportunities for the public to provide input on uses of its 15% share.[9]

• 15% local share: Generally, yes. Though local governments are not required to seek public input as to opioid settlement spending specifically, they generally must accept public comments during their public meetings.[10] Take advantage of this requirement by showing up to meetings of your city council or board of county commissioners and offering comments on local settlement spending.

Can I apply for grants?

Yes. Visit the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust’s Grant Portal to learn more about grant opportunities from the 70% Opioid Abatement Trust share.[11] Local governments also may create grant programs to distribute their share of funds. The existence, parameters, and processes for local settlement grant programs will vary by locality, so stay alert for new opportunities. Visit the Opioid Settlement Community Grants Portal (OpioidSettlementTracker.com and Legal Action Center) for the most up-to-date information on settlement grant opportunities for community organizations.

Where do I go for updates?

• For updates on the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust share, visit the Trust’s website, which lists its Advisory Committee members, includes information about the Committee’s past and upcoming meetings, and provides contact information for Abatement Regions.

  • You can also check out the Montana Association of Counties’ opioid settlement website, which describes Abatement Regions’ governance structure processes, and the websites for the individual Abatement Regions’ governing structures (e.g., Lewis & Clark Metro Region Opioid Governance Committee).[12]

• A single resource containing updates specific to the state share could not be found.[13]

• For updates on the local share, visit the Montana Association of Counties’ opioid settlement website. Another good starting point is to check the websites for your city council, board of county commissioners, or local health department.

What else should I know?

You can contact the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust is via the contact form on its website or by emailing its executive director, Rusty Gackle, at rusty@montanaopioid.org.

Citations

1. See Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (“Montana Settlement MOU”), Secs. D(7), D(9)-(10). November 26, 2021. See also Amendment to Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding. January 27, 2022. ↑

2. Lewis & Clark Metro Region Opioid Governance Committee. City of Helena website. Accessed September 1, 2024 (“The Lewis & Clark Metro Region Opioid Abatement Governance Committee meets quarterly, as needed, to review regional applications for funding and make recommendations to the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust (‘MOAT’) Advisory Committee for final review and approval. … The committee includes an elected representative from the Helena City Commission, Lewis and Clark County Board of County Commissioners, and the City of East Helena’s governing body, as well as two appointed community members [—] a community member that resides in the City of Helena appointed by City of Helena Commission, and a community member that resides in Lewis and Clark County appointed by Lewis and Clark County’s Board of County Commissioners”). See the Committee’s bylaws here. ↑

3. See, e.g., Agenda. Lewis & Clark County Metro Region Governance Committee. June 26, 2024. Accessed September 1, 2024. ↑

4. If you see this change, email tips@opioidsettlementtracker.com. ↑

5. Montana Settlement MOU, Sec. C(12). November 26, 2021 (emphasis added). ↑

6. Montana Settlement MOU, Sec. D(15). November 26, 2021. See also Declaration of Trust – The Montana Opioid Abatement Trust, Sec. 3.6. August 1, 2022. ↑

7. See Mont. Code Ann. Secs. 2-3-103(1)(a), (1)(b) (“The agency shall publish an agenda for a meeting”), (1)(c) (“The agenda must include an item allowing public comment on any public matter that is not on the agenda of the meeting and that is within the jurisdiction of the agency conducting the meeting”); Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 2-3-102(1) (defining “[a]gency” to mean “any board, bureau, commission, department, authority, or officer of the state or local government authorized by law to make rules, determine contested cases, or enter into contracts”) (emphasis added); Montana Settlement MOU, Sec. C(1) (requiring Attorney General to create a “private, non-profit Abatement Trust”). November 26, 2021; and Second Amendment to the November 2021 Memorandum of Understanding (amending the state’s original MOU to add Section C, Paragraph 13, which states that the Committee must draft its own bylaws but that it “shall not have rulemaking authority under Montana law”). June 15, 2022. ↑

8. See, e.g., 11/28/2023 Meeting Agenda, 4/11/2024 Meeting Agenda, and 7/18/2024 Meeting Minutes. ↑

9. If you see this change, email tips@opioidsettlementtracker.com. This 15% state share is allocated 50-50 between the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services and the Montana Department of Justice. Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services/Montana Department of Justice Memorandum of Understanding: Allocation and Use of Opioid Settlement Funds, Sec. 2.1. Both departments are subject to a state law requiring them to permit public participation on “agency action … that is of significant interest to the public.” Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 2-3-103(1)(a). However, it is uncertain whether the departments will consider settlement spending decisions as meeting this threshold. See Mont. Admin. R. 37.2.203(2) (establishing MDPHHS’ discretionary authority to determine whether most agency actions are of “significant public interest”). ↑

10. Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 2-3-102(1) (defining “agency” to mean, with limited exception, “any board, bureau, commission, department, authority, or officer of the state or local government authorized by law to make rules, determine contested cases, or enter into contracts”) (emphasis added); Sec. 2-3-103(1)(a) (“Each agency shall develop procedures for permitting and encouraging the public to participate in agency decisions that are of significant interest to the public”); Sec. 2-3-103(1)(b) (“The agency shall publish an agenda for a meeting”); Sec. 2-3-103(1)(c) (“The agenda must include an item allowing public comment on any public matter that is not on the agenda of the meeting and that is within the jurisdiction of the agency conducting the meeting”); Sec. 7-1-4142 (requiring municipal governing bodies to “develop procedures for permitting and encouraging the public to participate in decisions that are of significant interest to the public”). See also Open Meetings and Public Participation. Montana Association of Counties. July 2023. But see Jones v. Cty. of Missoula, 2006 MT 2 (Montana Supreme Court holding that “Missoula County was not required by Mont. Code Ann. Sec. 2-3-103(2)(2001) to adopt and publish formal guidelines for encouraging public participation in County business”). ↑

11. Grant Portal. Montana Opioid Abatement Trust. Accessed September 1, 2024. Click “Apply Here” to create an online account. ↑

12. Lewis & Clark Metro Region Opioid Governance Committee. City of Helena website. Accessed September 1, 2024 (“The Lewis & Clark Metro Region Opioid Abatement Governance Committee meets quarterly, as needed, to review regional applications for funding and make recommendations to the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust ("MOAT") Advisory Committee for final review and approval. … The committee includes an elected representative from the Helena City Commission, Lewis and Clark County Board of County Commissioners, and the City of East Helena’s governing body, as well as two appointed community members [—] a community member that resides in the City of Helena appointed by City of Helena Commission, and a community member that resides in Lewis and Clark County appointed by Lewis and Clark County’s Board of County Commissioners”). See the Committee’s bylaws here. ↑

13. If you see this change, email tips@opioidsettlementtracker.com. ↑

Here are the entities that ultimately decide how each of Montana’s opioid settlement shares are spent:

• 70% Montana Opioid Abatement Trust share: for 80% of funds, Abatement Regions and local governments; for 20%, Montana Opioid Abatement Trust Advisory Committee

• 15% state share: Montana Department of Public Health and Montana Department of Justice

• 15% local share: local officials for cities and counties

Where do these monies live?

This share is distributed directly to participating cities and counties according to Exhibit B of Montana’s MOU.[1] These monies are separate from the funds participating local governments will also receive from the Trust regional allocations.[2]

Non-participating local governments’ amounts are redirected to the Trust for use by their regions.[3]

What can this share be spent on?

Montana’s MOU does not explicitly require this share to be spent on opioid remediation.[4] However, at least a portion of monies in this share must inevitably be spent on abatement uses (as illustrated by the national settlement agreements’ non-exhaustive Exhibit E, which includes prevention, harm reduction, treatment, recovery, and other strategies) for the state to meet its minimum opioid remediation spending requirements under the different agreements.[5]

Who ultimately decides how to spend this share (and how)?

Local governments decide autonomously. Decisionmakers for the cities and counties will ultimately decide for themselves how to spend their monies.[6]

Is this share attached to an explicit bar against supplantation?

No, supplantation is discouraged but not prohibited. Montana’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) provides that “the State of Montana and its Local Governments [are] enter[ing] into this MOU … to develop a fair and transparent process for making decisions based on medical and scientific evidence concerning where and how to spend the funds from the Settlement Agreements to effectuate forward-looking abatement strategies and to supplement rather than replace existing spending”.[7] The absence of explicit “shall” or “shall not” (or equivalent) language renders this provision a strong discouragement against rather than an explicit prohibition of expenditures that replace (or “supplant”) — rather than supplement — existing resources.

Can I see how this share has been spent?

Up to each locality (neither public nor intrastate reporting required). Opioid settlement expenditures are not officially published in a centralized location for this share.

Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s Expenditure Report Tracker for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

1. Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) D.3(c) (“Fifteen percent (15%) shall be allocated directly to the Local Government Fund”) and MOU D.8 (“Amounts apportioned to the Local Government Fund shall be distributed to Participating Local Governments … per … Exhibit B”). See also Montana Association of Counties: Trust Allocation Percentages and Authorized Officials. ↑

2. See, e.g., MOU Amendment I (“The governance structure of the Abatement Regions described in paragraph D.9 shall allow for Local Governments within the Region to independently access funds from the Abatement Trust’). ↑

3. MOU D.8. ↑

4. See MOU D. ↑

5. See, e.g., Distributor Settlement Agreement, Sec. V(B)(1) (minimum 85% opioid remediation spending); CVS Settlement Agreement, Sec. V(B)(1) (minimum 95.5% opioid remediation spending); Walgreens Settlement Agreement, Sec. V(B)(1) (minimum 95% opioid remediation spending); Walmart Settlement Agreement, Sec. V(B)(1) (minimum 85% opioid remediation spending). ↑

6. MOU D.3(c) and D.8. ↑

7. Importantly, this prohibition appears in recital (a) of Montana’s opioid settlement memorandum of understanding rather than in an operative provision. Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding. November 26, 2021 (emphasis added). ↑

Where do these monies live?

The state’s 15% share is deposited into the State of Montana Fund,[1] then allocated 50%-50% between the Department of Public Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice.[2] This share may be redirected to support the Advisory Committee’s statewide programming.[3]

What can this share be spent on?

With limited exceptions,[4] this share must be spent for “Opioid Remediation,”[5] which Montana explicitly defines to mean only forward-looking expenditures as described in the national settlement agreement’s (non-exhaustive) Exhibit E.[6] Exhibit E includes prevention, harm reduction, treatment, recovery, and other strategies.

Montana also defines remediation efforts in the state to specifically include opioid and polysubstance use disorder treatment and prevention strategies; substance use avoidance education; efforts to “decrease the oversupply of licit and illicit opioids, including Fentanyl”; recovery support; and “support for law enforcements (sic) addressing the impact of opioid-related substance abuse in the communities they serve, including misuse or illicit use of heroin and/or Fentanyl.”[7]

Who ultimately decides how to spend this share (and how)?

Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services and Montana Department of Justice decide. Decisionmakers for the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services (DPHHS) and Montana Department of Justice (DOJ) will ultimately decide how to spend their monies on approved uses.[8] Both departments are required to share planned programs and activities with each other at least quarterly and communicate any needs for technical assistance,[9] and DPHHS must provide subject matter expertise on approved uses at DOJ’s request.[10] Each are encouraged to collaborate on programming.[11]

Is this share attached to an explicit bar against supplantation?

No, supplantation is discouraged but not prohibited. Montana’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) provides that “the State of Montana and its Local Governments [are] enter[ing] into this MOU … to develop a fair and transparent process for making decisions based on medical and scientific evidence concerning where and how to spend the funds from the Settlement Agreements to effectuate forward-looking abatement strategies and to supplement rather than replace existing spending”.[12] The absence of explicit “shall” or “shall not” (or equivalent) language renders this provision a strong discouragement against rather than an explicit prohibition of expenditures that replace (or “supplant”) — rather than supplement — existing resources.

Can I see how this share has been spent?

No (no public reporting required, only intrastate). Opioid settlement expenditures are not officially published in a centralized location for this share.[13]

Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s Expenditure Report Tracker for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

1. Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) D.3(a) (“Fifteen percent (15%) shall be allocated to directly to the State of Montana Fund”) and MOU D.2 (specifies that all three allocations are “direct-deposited”). ↑

2. Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services/Montana Department of Justice Memorandum of Understanding: Allocation and Use of Settlement Funds (DPHHS/DOJ MOU) Sec. 2.1 (“The Settlement Funds allocated to the State of Montana Fund will be evenly divided between DOJ and DPHHS. such that 50% shall be allocated to DPHHS and 50% to DOJ”). ↑

3. MOU D.12 (“Funds from the Abatement Trust may also be expended by the Trust for statewide programs, innovation, research, and education,” and “[e]xpenditures for these purposes may … be funded by the Trust with funds received from … the State of Montana’s share (as directed by the Attorney General in consultation with DPHHS)”). ↑

4. “MOU E.6 and MOU Amendment I (“The Montana Attorney Fee Back-Stop Fund shall be funded by 5.5% of the total settlement funds paid to the State of Montana”). MOU E.7-9 (describing permissible uses of 5.5% back-stop fund only in instances of a “shortfall,” with any unused amounts reallocated according to the original statewide allocation percentages described in Section D of the MOU). See also MOU A.7 (“[q]ualifying [approved use] expenditures may include reasonably related administrative expenses”) ↑

5. MOU D.4 (“The Settlement Funds allocated to the State of Montana Fund shall be used by the State for Approved Purposes”). ↑

6. MOU A.7 (“Exhibit E in the Settlements Agreements provides a non-exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as Opioid Remediation,” i.e., the “care, treatment, and other forward-looking programs and expenditures for Approved Purposes”) and MOU A.8 (defining “Approved Purposes” to mean “forward-looking strategies, programming, and services to abate the opioid epidemic as identified by the terms of the Settlement Agreements”). ↑

7. MOU A.7 (defining “opioid remediation”). ↑

8. DPHHS/DOJ MOU Sec. 2.2 (“Each Department will determine how to best use its portion of the funds for Approved Uses, also referred to as Approved Purposes”). See also MOU D.4 (describing use the funds from this share as “determined by a separate committee made up of representatives from the Attorney General and the Montana Department of Health and Human Services”). This provision predates the MOU between the Department of Public Health and Human Services and the Department of Justice. ↑

9. DPHHS/DOJ MOU Sec. 2.4. ↑

10. DPHHS/DOJ MOU Sec. 2.4. ↑

11. DPHHS/DOJ MOU Sec. 2.3 (“as desired”). ↑

12. Importantly, this prohibition appears in recital (a) of Montana’s opioid settlement memorandum of understanding rather than in an operative provision. Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding. November 26, 2021 (emphasis added). ↑

13. For the intrastate reporting requirement, see Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services/Montana Department of Justice Memorandum of Understanding: Allocation and Use of Settlement Funds (DPHHS/DOJ MOU) Sec. 2.4 ("As a minimum, each Department will communicate with the other as follows: Once per quarter, each Department will provide to the other, in writing, a summary of any programs or activities funded in such quarter, any programs in the process of being funded, and any programs being considering for funding. To the extent not encompassed in the above, each Department will disclose to the other the planned funding of any program or activity as expediently as possible after receiving a funding request"). ↑

Where do these monies live?

Seventy percent (70%) of the state’s opioid settlement funds are held in the private, non-profit Montana Opioid Abatement Trust created by the Attorney General.[1]

• 80% Abatement Regions sub-share (56% of statewide total). At least 80% of this share is allocated for use by local governments through Montana’s 14 participating abatement regions,[2] i.e., the 5 Department of Public Health and Human Services-defined multi-county regions and 9 metro regions (counties with populations over 30,000) listed here.[3] Any non-participating localities’ amounts are redirected to the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust.[4]

• 20% Advisory Committee sub-share (14% of statewide total). The remaining 20% of this share can be used by the Advisory Committee on statewide programming,[5] with any funds not used for those purposes redistributed to participating abatement regions according to Exhibit B of Montana’s MOU.[6]

What can this share be spent on?

With limited exceptions,[7] this share must be spent for “Opioid Remediation,”[8] which Montana explicitly defines to mean only forward-looking expenditures as described in the national settlement agreement’s (non-exhaustive) Exhibit E.[9] Exhibit E includes prevention, harm reduction, treatment, recovery, and other strategies.

Montana also defines opioid remediation efforts in the state to specifically include opioid and polysubstance use disorder treatment and prevention strategies; substance use avoidance education; efforts to “decrease the oversupply of licit and illicit opioids, including Fentanyl”; recovery support; and “support for law enforcements (sic) addressing the impact of opioid-related substance abuse in the communities they serve, including misuse or illicit use of heroin and/or Fentanyl.”[10]

Who ultimately decides how to spend this share (and how)?

For 80% of funds, Abatement Regions and local governments decide; for 20%, Montana Opioid Abatement Trust Advisory Committee decides. The Abatement Regions, participating local governments, and the Montana Opioid Abatement Trust Advisory Committee, ultimately decide how disbursements from the Trust are spent on specific opioid remediation expenditures. The Advisory Committee, which governs the trust,[11] is required to facilitate collaboration among the state, regions, and participating local governments and develop a process for receiving their input on abatement efforts.[12]

• 80% Abatement Regions sub-share. Abatement Regions and local governments ultimately decide specific opioid remediation uses of this sub-share.[13]

  • Each Abatement Region is responsible for planning, budgeting, and disbursing their sub-shares on opioid remediation projects “that will equitably and appropriately serve the needs of the entire Region,”[14] and their governance structures are required to include the input of their participating local governments in the selection of regional projects.[15]

  • Abatement Regions, which may collaborate to submit joint applications,[16] submit their proposals to the Advisory Committee, and Trust monies are disbursed after the Committee determines that a proposal meets the criteria for opioid remediation and approved purposes.[17]

  • The Advisory Committee’s role as to this sub-share is advisory only: it exists to provide “professional advice” to regions when requested and may not reject proposals for approved uses of settlement funds.[18]

• 20% Advisory Committee sub-share. The Advisory Committee may vote to use this share for “statewide programs, innovation, research, and education,”[19] and any funds not used for those purposes are redistributed to participating abatement regions according to Exhibit B of Montana’s MOU.[20]

Is this share attached to an explicit bar against supplantation?

No, supplantation is discouraged but not prohibited. Montana’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) provides that “the State of Montana and its Local Governments [are] enter[ing] into this MOU … to develop a fair and transparent process for making decisions based on medical and scientific evidence concerning where and how to spend the funds from the Settlement Agreements to effectuate forward-looking abatement strategies and to supplement rather than replace existing spending”.[21] The absence of explicit “shall” or “shall not” (or equivalent) language renders this provision a strong discouragement against rather than an explicit prohibition of expenditures that replace (or “supplant”) — rather than supplement — existing resources.

Can I see how this share has been spent?

No (neither public nor intrastate reporting required). Opioid settlement expenditures are not officially published in a centralized location for this share.

Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s Expenditure Report Tracker for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

1. Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) D.3(b) (“Seventy percent (70%) shall be allocated directly to the [Montana Opioid] Abatement Trust”) and MOU C.1 (“The Attorney General shall create a private, non-profit Abatement Trust”). ↑

2. MOU D.7 (“Of the amount apportioned to the Abatement Trust … eighty percent (80%) shall be allocated to the Participating Abatement Regions according to the Subdivision Allocation Percentages in Exhibit B, on the assumption that all Subdivisions within each region become Participating Subdivisions”) and MOU B.4 (“All the Metropolitan Regions that agree to the Settlement Agreements and this MOU as well as all the constituent Participating Local Governments comprising a Multi-County Abatement Region that have chosen to enter into this MOU and the Settlement Agreements shall be treated as Participating Abatement Regions”). ↑

3. MOU B.1 (describing the 14 abatement regions) and B.2 (“The nine Metropolitan Regions having populations of 30,000 or more are Yellowstone, Missoula, Gallatin, Flathead, Cascade, Lewis & Clark, Silver Bow, Ravalli, and Lake Counties, provided they participate in this Agreement.)” ↑

4. MOU B.4 (“For the sake of clarification, any county or city listed in the MOU Abatement Region Allocation, attached as Exhibit B, within a Multi-County Region that does not enter into this MOU and the Settlement Agreements shall not be included in the Abatement Region where it is geographically located and shall not be entitled to receive any funds from the Settlement. Rather, the share(s) of the funds that a nonparticipating city or county would be allocated according to Exhibit B shall instead be allocated to the Abatement Trust”). ↑

5. MOU D.12 (“Funds from the Abatement Trust may also be expended by the Trust for statewide programs, innovation, research, and education. Any statewide programs funded from the Trust would be only as directed by an affirmative majority vote of the Committee”). ↑

6. MOU Amendment I (“To the extent the Abatement Trust Advisory Committee does not expend funds in the Abatement Trust … on statewide programs … , the Committee shall allocate the funds to Participating Abatement Regions and Local Governments in the same manner as the funds described in paragraph D.7”) and MOU D.7 (describing the 80% Trust allocation to Participating Abatement Regions according to Exhibit B of Montana’s MOU). ↑

7. MOU E.6 and Amendment to Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU Amendment I) (“The Montana Attorney Fee Back-Stop Fund shall be funded by 5.5% of the total settlement funds paid to the State of Montana”). MOU E.7-9 (describing permissible uses of 5.5% back-stop fund only in instances of a “shortfall,” with any unused amounts reallocated according to the original statewide allocation percentages described in Section D of the MOU. MOU D.11 (instructing the Committee and the Abatement Regions that “budgeting for operating expenditures should be conservative and carefully limited” without explicitly capping the Committee’s or Regions’ administrative expenses). See also MOU A.7 (“[q]ualifying [approved use] expenditures may include reasonably related administrative expenses”). ↑

8. MOU D.3(b). See also MOU D.5 (“The Settlement Funds allocated to the Abatement Trust shall be paid into the Abatement Trust for Approved Purposes”). ↑

9. MOU A.7 (“Exhibit E in the Settlements Agreements provides a non-exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as Opioid Remediation,” i.e., the “care, treatment, and other forward-looking programs and expenditures for Approved Purposes”) and MOU A.8 (defining “Approved Purposes” to mean “forward-looking strategies, programming, and services to abate the opioid epidemic as identified by the terms of the Settlement Agreements”). ↑

10. MOU A.7. ↑

11. MOU C.2. ↑

12. MOU C.16 (“The Committee shall facilitate collaboration between the State, Regions, and Participating Local Governments regarding sharing information related to abating the opioid crisis in Montana”) and MOU C.12 (“At the first meeting the Committee shall develop written guidelines for receiving input from the State of Montana, Abatement Regions, Local Governments, and others regarding how the opioid crisis is affecting their jurisdictions or communities and their respective abatement needs”). ↑

13. MOU B.1 (“Local and regional use of Opioid Settlement Funds shall be implemented through Abatement Regions and the Local Governments within those regions”) and MOU Amendment I (“The governance structure of the Abatement Regions described in paragraph D.9 shall allow for Local Governments within the Region to independently access funds from the Abatement Trust’). See also Montana Association of Counties, National Opioid Settlements (describing this sub-share as “allocated for use by local governments,” with “[c]ounties participat[ing] in the Abatement Trust and Council through ‘Abatement Regions’”). ↑

14. MOU D.10. ↑

15. MOU D.9. The amendments to Montana’s MOU also allow a local government to establish its own governance structures to access and administer its share of Trust monies independent of its Abatement Region. MOU Amendment I (“Consistent with the authority granted to Abatement Regions … , any Participating Local Government may also create its own governance structure for the administration, management and use of Opioid Remediation funds [and] may access the funds allocated to the Abatement Trust … based on its allocation percentage in Exhibit B”). ↑

16. MOU D.13. ↑

17. MOU D.14 (“Disbursements for proposed Opioid Remediation programs and services to Participating Abatement Regions shall be reviewed by the Committee to determine whether the proposed disbursements meet the criteria for Opioid Remediation and Approved Purposes”) and MOU Amendment I (“The Committee’s responsibility to review proposals as set forth in paragraph D.14 shall be limited to confirmation that the proposal identifies Approved Purposes for which the funds will be expended”). ↑

18. MOU Amendment I (regarding “C.12 of the MOU”). ↑

19. MOU D.12 (“Funds from the Abatement Trust may also be expended by the Trust for statewide programs, innovation, research, and education. Any statewide programs funded from the Trust would be only as directed by an affirmative majority vote of the Committee”). ↑

20. MOU Amendment I (“To the extent the Abatement Trust Advisory Committee does not expend funds in the Abatement Trust … on statewide programs … , the Committee shall allocate the funds to Participating Abatement Regions and Local Governments in the same manner as the funds described in paragraph D.7”) and MOU D.7 (describing the 80% Trust allocation to Participating Abatement Regions according to Exhibit B of Montana’s MOU). ↑

21. Importantly, this prohibition appears in recital (a) of Montana’s opioid settlement memorandum of understanding rather than in an operative provision. Montana Distributors’ and Janssen Opioids Settlement Memorandum of Understanding. November 26, 2021 (emphasis added). ↑

This Community Guide will describe how Montana is spending its opioid settlements, and whether Montana is working to ensure community access to opioid settlement funds. Last revised September 1, 2024.

• (March 2023)

Montana Department of Public Health & Human Services

Montana Public Health Institute

Has the state established an advisory body for settlement funds?

Yes. In addition to requiring the creation of the to hold 70% of the state’s settlement funds, Montana’s requires the creation of an whose members (also referred to as “Operating Trustees”) oversee the Trust.[1] The Advisory Committee is responsible for:

• Developing its own bylaws and other governing documents after collaboration with local, regional, and state legal counsel, to “minimiz[e] red tape and maximiz[e] the efficient flow of funds to abate the opioid problem”[2]

• Facilitating collaboration among the state, regions, and local governments to “shar[e] information related to abating the opioid crisis in Montana”[3]

• Developing written guidelines to receive input from the State, its Abatement Regions, local governments, and others “regarding how the opioid crisis is affecting their jurisdictions or communities and their respective abatement needs”[4]

• Review proposed disbursements of Trust monies to Abatement Regions to determine whether they qualify as an approved purpose[5]

The Advisory Committee may:

• Approve funding from the Trust “for statewide programs, innovation, research, and education”[6]

• Provide “professional advice” to Abatement Regions “when requested”[7]

• Require local governments and other entities that receive funds from the Trust to provide outcome data, which the Advisory Committee then may publish[8]

The Advisory Committee must meet at least quarterly,[9] and its meetings must be open to the public.[10]

Is the state advisory body required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

No. The Advisory Committee is not required to include a member with lived and/or living experience. The MOU does provide that one of the Committee’s ten members “may be, but is not required to be, a family member of a person who had or has suffered from opioid use disorder.”[11]

What is the overall membership of the state advisory body?

The Advisory Committee includes ten voting members split evenly between state and local government members.[12] You can view a list of current Advisory Committee members — or “Operating Trustees” — .[13]

• Terms: Advisory Committee members are appointed to three-year terms and may serve more than one term.[18]

• Executive Director: The Trust’s executive director, appointed by the state attorney general, serves as an ex-officio member who may vote only to break a tie.[19]

Are local governments required to establish a settlement advisory body? If so, are local advisory bodies required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

No (up to each locality). Local governments in Montana are not required to establish opioid settlement advisory bodies. However, localities may choose to establish advisory councils that include members with lived and/or living experience to help ensure that settlement spending reflects community priorities.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations