This 15% share is distributed to participating cities and counties, who each then transfer their funds to their local public health unit.[1] Though local governments may keep their shares, all were encouraged to redirect them instead to the state’s Opioid Settlement Fund for uses on “joint opioid abatement strategies and remediation uses statewide.”[2]
With limited exceptions,[3] this share must be spent on the uses described in the national settlement agreement’s (non- exhaustive) Exhibit E,[4] which includes which includes prevention, harm reduction, treatment, recovery, and other strategies.
Local governments decide in collaboration with their local public health units (and must submit plans prior to spend). Decisionmakers for the cities and counties will ultimately decide how to spend their monies on Exhibit E uses in collaboration with their local public health units,[5] and each local government must provide an allocation plan to the DHHS Behavioral Health Division prior to spending its share.[6] DHHS publishes these Political Subdivision Allocation Plans on its website.
No, supplantation is not prohibited. Like most states, North Dakota does not explicitly prohibit supplantation uses of its opioid settlement funds. This means that the 15% local share may be spent in ways that replace (or “supplant”) — rather than supplement — existing resources.
Up to each locality (no public reporting required, only intrastate). Opioid settlement expenditures are not officially published in a centralized location for this share. Localities must annually report their spend to DHHS, and DHHS is required to include localities’ expenditures in its annual report to the legislature.[7]
Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s Expenditure Report Tracker for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.
Not applicable.
N.D. Cent. Code Sec. 50-36-06(1) (“A political subdivision that recovers moneys as a result of opioid litigation may deposit the moneys in the fund or may retain the moneys and transfer the moneys to the public health unit that provides services to that political subdivision”). ↑
Attorney General letter to cities and counties. Undated. Accessed August 13, 2024 (encouraging localities to “allocate [their] 15% Subdivision Fund under the settlements to be added to the joint Abatement Account Fund and used for joint opioid abatement strategies and remediation uses statewide”). ↑
N.D. Cent. Code Sec. 50-36-02 (“The fund does not include funds not retained by the state pursuant to law or court order”) and Distributor Settlement Agreement I.SS (“Exhibit E provides a non-exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as being paid for Opioid Remediation. Qualifying expenditures may include reasonable related administrative expenses”). ↑
N.D. Cent. Code Sec. 50-36-05 (requiring DHHS to use Fund monies “for remediating and abating the opioid crisis”). North Dakota Opioid Settlement. DHHS website. Accessed August 13, 2024. (“The usage of settlement funds must be used for opioid remediation and align with approved usages as identified in the settlement document Exhibit E”). ↑
N.D. Cent. Code Sec. 50-36-06(2) (“A political subdivision that recovers and retains moneys as a result of opioid litigation shall collaborate with a public health unit on the use of the moneys for local programs for remediating and abating the opioid crisis. The use of moneys under this subsection must be in compliance with any court-ordered restrictions”). ↑
N.D. Cent. Code Sec. 50-36-06(2) (“All political subdivisions shall provide an allocation plan to the behavioral health division prior to expenditure” and the “[t]he political subdivision and public health unit shall work together to ensure all reporting requirements are met”). ↑
N.D. Cent. Code Sec. 50-36-04(2). DHHS includes this information in the report that it is required to submit to the legislature under N.D. Cent. Code Sec. 50-36-04(3). ↑