Editorial: Use of opioid money needs public input

The mounting toll from the ongoing opioid crisis continues to set records locally, with the number of overdose deaths this year eclipsing last year’s record even before Halloween.

By the end of October, 35 people had died this year of drug overdoses, hastened by the prevalence of deadly fentanyl. At the pace we are on, The Republic’s Andy East reported, we can expect about 42 fatal overdoses this year. Last year’s record high was 33 deaths.

Of course, this crisis has grown deadlier due to an epidemic of addiction. For decades, Big Pharma, distributors and other players in the industry profited wildly from the overprescribing of opioids, knowing full well their addictive nature.

This national disgrace led to litigation, and so far, a few settlements have meted out penalties. Money will come to local governments that have picked up tabs too numerous to even quantify, given the cost in human lives and the lives of families and communities.

Bartholomew County is planning to receive $3 million over 18 years in one settlement that includes drug distributors AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson, along with opioid manufacturer Johnson & Johnson.

The Republic’s Mark Webber reported last week that county commissioners are making plans to receive these funds, setting up accounts for settlement money to flow into.

“There has been no discussion on how this money will be used,” commissioner Tony London said. “But whatever amount the settlement is won’t come close to touching the damage that was done.”

London is absolutely right in the second part of his comment above. How can you put a price on the untimely loss of a loved one? Multiply that by the scores of people in Bartholomew County alone who have been lost to addiction and the lives around them that have been shattered. And that’s just for starters.

But we’d like to come back to the first part of London’s comment above — the part about there having been no discussion of how this money will be used.

We understand this is early in the process, but our local officials should feel a duty to everyone who has been touched by the opioid epidemic to have a broad, open and robust community conversation about where this hard-earned money should go, and what our priorities should be.

This epidemic is not going away. If anything, the grim number of overdose deaths show it is only growing worse.

We are making no suggestions about how this money should be spent. We do believe, however, that the county commissioners and county council owe it to their constituents to facilitate public hearings in which people have an opportunity to voice their views about how this public money should be allocated.

Simply put, the people most affected by the opioid crisis should have a say in this. Anyone who has something to say about it ought to be given that opportunity. And the county should act on ideas that have merit.

Perhaps most importantly, we also believe that any settlement money received as a result of opioid civil lawsuits should supplement — not replace — the funding the county already dedicates to fighting substance abuse.

The county has a real opportunity to use opioid settlement money to save lives and mend tears in the fabric of our community. We hope they do so, guided by openness and a servant spirit.