Staff Reports
Colorado's recent allocation of $4 million to combat the opioid crisis sparked both applause and skepticism. Attorney General Phil Weiser's office unveiled this substantial funding, aiming to confront the opioid epidemic through eight selected organizations. Despite the commendable effort, the allocation drew varied reactions, with some questioning the prudence of utilizing taxpayer money in this manner.
Colorado organizations getting $4M in grants from $740M opioid settlement (The Center Square) – Eight Colorado organizations will receive a total of $4 million from a state grant program that addresses the opioid epidemic, Attorney General Phil Weiser’s…https://t.co/EYYhpbADag
— The Black Chronicle (@BlackChron) December 28, 2023
Under the banner of the Opioid Abatement Innovation Challenge Grant program, Weiser's office championed the distribution. However, dissenters voiced concerns about ballooning government expenditures. The process, overseen by the Opioid Crisis Recovery Funds Advisory Committee, reviewed 66 proposals, eventually awarding $4 million, a fraction of the $44 million sought. This disparity raises eyebrows about fiscal discipline in governmental initiatives, an issue that seems all too common.
Notably, these funds originate from settlements extracted from lawsuits against drug manufacturers and distributors, amassing a substantial $740 million. The debate arises: Shouldn't restitution from the opioid crisis directly benefit affected taxpayers rather than diversely disbursed to organizations? For some, this exemplifies an encroachment of big government.
The Denver Health and Hospital Authority claimed the lion's share, securing $790,000 for their Colorado Opioid Model to Advance Treatment initiative. Promising to expand treatment accessibility and coordination across the state, doubts linger about the approach's potential impact on the crisis.
Meanwhile, the Colorado Boys and Girls Clubs received $480,000 for their preventive educational endeavors during school breaks and after-school programs. Advocates argue that educating youngsters on opioid and fentanyl perils is proactive, yet skeptics question the investment's wisdom.
Additional beneficiaries of these grants include the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Colorado Health Network, Larimer County Sheriff’s Office, Rocky Mountain Crisis Partners, Serenity Recovery Connection, and Tepeyac Community Health Center. Each organization secured significant funding ranging from $400,000 to $600,000.
While Attorney General Weiser hails this as a positive stride, doubts persist about the optimal use of taxpayer funds. In the labyrinth of government spending, accountability often seems overshadowed by symbolic gestures, leaving many to ponder when a balance will be struck. The fundamental question lingers: Is this truly enough to stem the tide of the opioid crisis?
