HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-22-2021 Regular MeetingCITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
Regular Meeting of the City Council City Hall 2077 West Larpenteur Avenue AGENDA
December 22, 2021 at 7:00 P.M.
NOTE: THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD BY WEB CONFERENCE*
A. CALL TO ORDER:
B.ROLL CALL: ANDREWS ___ GUSTAFSON____ LEEHY___
MIAZGA ___ WEHYEE___
STAFF PRESENT: THONGVANH____
C.PRESENTATION
D. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
E.PUBLIC HEARINGS:
F.CONSENT AGENDA:1. General Disbursements through: 12/17/21 $109,717.03Payroll through: 12/15/21 $19,464.67
2.City License(s)
3. Resignation of Dana Dumbacher from the Community Engagement Commission4. Resignation of Dena Larrabee from the Community Engagement Commission5. Resignation of Sack Thongvanh as the City Administrator
G: POLICY ITEMS:
1.Opioid Settlements – Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
H. INFORMATION/ANNOUNCEMENTS:
I.COMMUNITY FORUM:
Please limit comments to 3 minutes per person. Items brought before the Council will be
referred for consideration. Council may ask questions for clarification, but no councilaction or discussion will be held on these items.
J.ADJOURNMENT:
*You can participate in the meeting by clicking the following Zoom link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89690260531
Toll Free Number:
1-877-853-5247
1-888-788-0099
Webinar ID: 896 9026 0531
BLANK PAGE
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
City of Falcon Heights, Minnesota __________________________
Item General Disbursements and Payroll Amended
Description
General Disbursements through: 12/17/21 $109,717.03
Payroll through: 12/15/21 $19,464.67
Budget Impact The general disbursements and payroll are consistent with the budget.
Attachment(s) • General Disbursements and Payroll
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommends that the Falcon Heights City Council approve general
disbursements and payroll.
Meeting Date December 22, 2021
Agenda Item Consent F1
Attachment General Disbursements and Payroll
Submitted By Roland Olson, Finance Director
BLANK PAGE
ITEM FOR DISCUSSION
City of Falcon Heights, Minnesota __________________________
Item Approval of City License(s)
Description
The following individuals/entities have applied for a Municipal Business
License for 2022. Staff have received the necessary documents for licensure.
1. James Kernik, DDS – 1549 Larpenteur Ave W
The following individuals/entities have applied for a Tree Contractors License
for 2022. Staff have received the necessary documents for licensure.
1. Savatree LLC
2. Hugo’s Tree Care, Inc.
The following individuals/entities have applied for a Single Family Rental
Dwelling License for 2022. Staff have received the necessary documents for
licensure.
1. HPA US1 LLC – 1354 California Ave W
2. HPA Borrower 2018-1 ML LLC – 1406 California Ave W
3. HPA II Borrower 2020-1 ML LLC - 1791 Holton Street
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) N/A
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommends approval of the City license applications contingent on
background checks and fire inspections as required.
Meeting Date December 22, 2021
Agenda Item Consent F2
Attachment N/A
Submitted By Vandara Thammavongsa
Assistant to the City Administrator
BLANK PAGE
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
City of Falcon Heights, Minnesota __________________________
Item Resignation of Dana Dumbacher from the Community Engagement
Commission
Description Dana Dumbacher was appointed in 2021 and was a great addition to the CEC.
Staff would like to thank Dana for her time and wish her well in future
endeavors.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) •Resolution 21-50 Resignation of Dana Dumbacher from the CEC
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommends approval of attached resolution accepting the resignation
of Dana Dumbacher from the Community Engagement Commission.
Meeting Date December 22, 2021
Agenda Item Consent F3
Attachment Resolution 21-50
Submitted By Megan Pavek, Administrative &
Communications Coordinator
BLANK PAGE
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
December 22, 2021
No. 21-50
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF DANA DUMBACHER FROM THE
FALCON HEIGHTS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the City appointed Dana Dumbacher as a member of the City of Falcon Heights
Community Engagement Commission in 2021; and
WHEREAS, on December 14, 2021 Mrs. Dumbacher communicated her intent to resign her
duties from the Commission effective immediately;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Falcon Heights,
Minnesota:
1. That the “Letter of Resignation” is accepted by the City Council of the City of Falcon
Heights.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moved by: Approved by: ________________________
Randall C. Gustafson
Mayor
GUSTAFSON ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________
MIAZGA Sack Thongvanh
ANDREWS ____ Against City Administrator
LEEHY
WEHYEE
BLANK PAGE
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
City of Falcon Heights, Minnesota __________________________
Item Resignation of Dena Larrabee from the Community Engagement Commission
Description Dena Larrabee was appointed in February 2018 and has been a great asset to
the City of Falcon Heights for the past three years. Staff are grateful for her
time, commitment, and leadership to the CEC.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) •Resolution 21-49 Resignation of Dena Larrabee from the Community
Engagement Commission
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommend approval of attached resolution accepting the resignation of
Dena Larrabee from the Community Engagement Commission.
Meeting Date December 22, 2021
Agenda Item Consent F4
Attachment Resolution 21-49
Submitted By Megan Pavek, Administrative &
Communications Coordinator
BLANK PAGE
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
December 22, 2021
No. 21-49
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF DENA LARRABEE FROM THE
FALCON HEIGHTS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the City appointed Dena Larrabee in February 2018 as a member of the City of
Falcon Heights Community Engagement Commission; and
WHEREAS, Mrs. Larrabee is approaching completion of her three-year term on the Community
Engagement Commission;
WHEREAS, on November 17, 2021 Mrs. Larrabee communicated her intent to resign her duties
from the Commission at the end of the calendar year;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Falcon Heights,
Minnesota:
1.That the “Letter of Resignation” is accepted by the City Council of the City of Falcon
Heights.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moved by: Approved by: ________________________
Randall C. Gustafson
Mayor
GUSTAFSON ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________
MIAZGA Sack Thongvanh
ANDREWS ____ Against City Administrator
LEEHY
WEHYEE
BLANK PAGE
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
City of Falcon Heights, Minnesota __________________________
Item Resignation of City Administrator Sack Thongvanh
Description City Administrator Sack Thongvanh was appointed in 2015 and has been a
great asset to the City of Falcon Heights for the past seven years.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) •Resolution 21-51 Resignation of City Administrator Sack Thongvanh
•Letter of Resignation from City Administrator Sack Thongvanh
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommend approval of attached resolution accepting the resignation of
City Administrator Sack Thongvanh.
Meeting Date December 22, 2021
Agenda Item Consent F5
Attachment Resolution & Letter
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
BLANK PAGE
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS COUNCIL RESOLUTION
December 22, 2021
No. 21-51 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE RESIGNATION OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR SACKTHONGVANH FROM THE CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
WHEREAS, the City hired Sack Thongvanh in 2015 as the City Administrator; and
WHEREAS, Sack Thongvanh submitted his letter of resignation with a last day in the office of February 1st, 2022;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Falcon Heights,
Minnesota:
1. That the “Letter of Resignation” is accepted by the City Council of the City of Falcon Heights.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -
Moved by: Approved by: ________________________
Randall C. Gustafson
Mayor
GUSTAFSON ____ In Favor Attested by: ________________________
MIAZGA Sack Thongvanh
ANDREWS ____ Against City Administrator
LEEHY
WEHYEE
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
City of Falcon Heights, Minnesota __________________________
Item Opioid Settlements – Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
Description Letter from our City Attorney.
Budget Impact N/A
Attachment(s) •Resolution 21-52 Approving the Memorandum of Agreement (moa) Between
the State of Minnesota and Local Governments and Authorizing Participation
in National Opioid Settlements
•Memorandum – City Attorney
•Memorandum - LMC
Action(s)
Requested
Staff recommend approval of attached resolution and authorize the City
Administrator to execute all necessary documents.
Meeting Date December 22, 2021
Agenda Item Policy G1
Attachment Resolution & Letter
Submitted By Sack Thongvanh, City Administrator
BLANK PAGE
CITY OF FALCON HEIGHTS
COUNCIL RESOLUTION
December 22, 2021
No. 21-52
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (MOA)
BETWEEN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND
AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN NATIONAL OPIOID SETTLEMENTS
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, Minnesota counties and cities, and their people, have been harmed by misconduct committed by certain entities that engage in the manufacture, marketing, promotion, distribution, or dispensing of opioids; and
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota and numerous Minnesota cities and counties joined with thousands of local governments across the country to file lawsuits against opioid manufacturer and pharmaceutical distribution companies and hold those companies accountable for their misconduct; and
WHEREAS, representatives of local Minnesota governments, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Association of Minnesota Counties, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, the State of Minnesota, and the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office have negotiated and prepared a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to provide for the equitable distribution of proceeds to the
State of Minnesota and to individual local governments from recent settlements in the national opioid litigation; and
WHEREAS, by signing onto the MOA, the state and local governments maximize Minnesota’s share of opioid settlement funds, demonstrate solidarity in response to the opioid epidemic, and
ensure needed resources reach the most impacted communities; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the State of Minnesota and the residents of the City of Falcon Heights, and the County of Ramsey that the City participate in the national opioid litigation settlements.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Falcon Heights Minnesota:
1.Participation in the opioid litigation settlements promotes the public health,
safety, and welfare of the residents of the City of Falcon Heights
2.The City of Falcon Heights supports the national opioid litigation settlements withthe Distributors McKesson, Cardinal Health, and Amerisource Bergen, and with
the Manufacturer Johnson & Johnson.
3. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the State of Minnesota andLocal Governments relating to the distribution of settlement funds is herebyapproved by the City of Falcon Heights
4.City Staff is hereby authorized to take such measures as necessary to sign the
MOA and otherwise support the national opioid settlements.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Moved by: Approved by: ________________________ Randall C. Gustafson Mayor
GUSTAFSON ___ In Favor Attested by: ________________________ MIAZGA Sack Thongvanh ANDREWS ___ Against City Administrator LEEHY WEHYEE
1
219621v1
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: FACLON HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL FROM: JARED SHEPHERD, LITIGATION COUNSEL DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2021
RE: PRESCRIPTION OPIOID LITIGATION SETTLEMENT
For several years, state and local governments have been in civil litigation with manufacturers
and distributors of prescription opioids related to the opioid crisis (“Prescription Opioid
Litigation”). The lawsuits largely allege facts that the pharmaceutical industry has promoted
opioid use to treat chronic pains at unprecedented rates, while ignoring or downplaying the
addictive properties of opioids and ignoring evidence of over-prescription and misuse. The
lawsuits allege that this activity resulted in mass addiction in opioid use and other illegal drugs,
crime, rising health care and insurance premiums, and other costs borne by public entities,
including cities. While jurisdictions impacts are unique, counties have largely experienced severe
impacts on social services (such as child protection) and public health programming and cities
have experienced impacts in public safety.
The State of Minnesota and 26 Minnesota counties and 7 other cities filed suit against a variety of opioid manufacturers and distributors. The political subdivisions filed their lawsuits in
Federal District Court, which the federal court system consolidated in a Multi-District Litigation action in Ohio. Several of the companies have filed for bankruptcy since the onset of litigation (e.g., Purdue Pharma).
There are two proposed nationwide settlements (“Opioid Litigation Settlements) intended to
resolve all litigation brought by state and local governments four entities: McKesson, Cardinal
Health and Amerisource Bergen (Settling “Distributors”), and Janssen Pharmaceutical/Johnson
& Johnson (“Settling Manufacturer”). The total settlement amount for both settlements is $26
billion. Importantly, in addition to monetary payments to abate the opioid epidemic, the
settlements contains injunctive relief provisions designed to target opioid marketing and sale and
distribution practices.
The negotiating parties structured the monetary component to incentivize states to promote local
government participation (for both litigating and non-litigating cities). The projected settlement
amount for Minnesota is $250 million+. The more political subdivisions participate, however,
the greater the amount of funds that flow to Minnesota and participating subdivisions. The
process requires all entities participating in the settlement to sign on by January 2, 2022. If the
City participates in the Opioid Litigation Settlements, it will be releasing all potential claims
against the Settling Distributors and Settling Manufacturer.
Over the last month or so, State and political subdivisions have worked through the allocation
that will occur when settlement money flows to the state. The Attorney General’s office has
consulted with various stakeholders, including litigating entities, public health officials, the
League of Minnesota Cities, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, and the Association of
2
219621v1
Minnesota Counties. All stakeholders worked cooperatively to create a framework that would
allow work for the state and local governments, foster collaboration and accountability, and be
available to focus on the areas where the most harm is occurring. The agreed upon framework
will be memorialized in a Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement
(“State-Subdivision Agreement”).
Some Key principles of this Agreement are as follows:
1.Financial Allocation:
a.75 % of money will go to Local Government Units (“LGU”); 25% to the State
b.Of the LGU share, 81% will go to counties, 12.11% to Litigation Cities/HealthDepartment Cities; 6.74 % to cities with populations over 30,000 that have notlitigated.c.If the State get full bonuses for maximum participation, this will be appx.$180,161.790.43 for LGUs.d.Payments will be made directly to local governments, beginning as early as April,2022. Pursuant to the national settlement, these payments will be funded over 18years.
2. Up to 7% of the local government share will be reserved for private attorneys’ fees.
Attorneys will be required to seek reimbursement through the federal settlement first.Unused funds will be returned to local governments for redistribution.
The City of Falcon Heights will not receive a direction allocation pursuant to the State-
Subdivision Agreement, but Ramsey County will receive an allocation.
In order for staff to initiate formal settlement approval, the Council must approve participation in
the Opioid Litigation Settlements and the State-Subdivision Agreement. Staff and legal counsel
recommend approval of the settlement and adopting the attached Resolution, which will
maximize funds for the County and the State.
Further information is provided in the attached materials from the League of Minnesota Cities
and the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office.
HOW MUCH MONEY IS COMING TO MINNESOTA AND WHY?
Minnesota, along with a broad coalition of states across the country, has reached agreements with four
companies to resolve legal claims for their role in the opioid crisis: manufacturer Johnson & Johnson,
and major pharmaceutical distributors AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson. The total
settlement is $26 billion. Minnesota’s maximum share of the settlements is projected to be at least $300
million over 18 years.
WHO WAS INVOLVED IN NEGOTIATING THE STATE-SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT?
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on the allocation and distribution of these settlement funds was
negotiated by representatives of local governments, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Association of
Minnesota Counties, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, and the State of Minnesota.
HOW ARE SETTLEMENT FUNDS TO BE USED?
Settlement funds must be used to support specific strategies to fight the opioid crisis that are identified
in the MOA. Although not all cities will receive a direct allocation from the settlements, all cities will
have the potential to access county and state grants, and will benefit from the opioid remediation
efforts by others that take place in their communities
WHAT IS PROCESS TO OPT IN AND WHAT ARE THE DEADLINES?
There is a deadline of January 2, 2022, for a sufficient threshold of Minnesota cities and counties to sign
on to the State-Subdivision Agreement and to opt into the national settlements. Failure to timely sign
on may significantly impact the amount of settlement funds ultimately received by Minnesota. Cities
should adopt a resolution or otherwise take action to formally approve the MOA, and affirmatively sign
on to the national settlements by visiting this website.
WHO SHOULD I CONTACT IF I HAVE QUESTIONS?
If you have questions about the settlements, national registration, or the MOA, contact the Minnesota
Attorney General’s Office at opioids@ag.state.mn.us or reach out directly to Patricia Beety, League
General Counsel, at pbeety@lmc.org or 651.281.1270.
FAQ’S ABOUT
MINNESOTA’S STATE-
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
OPIOIDS SETTLEMENT
ALLOCATION
AGREEMENT
1
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT SETTLEMENTS WITH OPIOID
DISTRIBUTORS AND JOHNSON & JOHNSON
This document is intended to assist Minnesota subdivisions evaluating the settlement agreements
resolving opioid claims with the three largest opioid distributors—McKesson, Cardinal Health,
and AmerisourceBergen (“Distributors”)—and opioid manufacturer Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and
its parent company, Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) (collectively, the “Settlements”). This document
is subject to being updated as additional information is gathered. The terms of the Settlements and
the Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement (“MN MOA”) are
controlling and are not amended or in any way affected by this document. Copies of these
settlements, agreement, and other materials can be found at the Attorney General’s website:
www.ag.state.mn.us/opioids.
1.My city or county received a notice in the mail and by email about two opioid
settlements. What do we do with this and how do we join the Settlements?
The notice your city or county received relates to two Settlements resolving opioid claims
against the country’s three largest drug distributors, McKesson, Cardinal Health, and
AmerisourceBergen, and opioid manufacturer Johnson & Johnson for their role in the
opioid epidemic. The notice went out to all Minnesota counties, as well as cities that have
a population greater than 10,000 and those that have filed lawsuits against these companies.
Under the Settlements, Minnesota and its cities and counties stand to receive up to $296
million in Opioid Settlement Funds to fight the opioid crisis over the next 18 years, starting
in early to mid-2022. The more cities and counties that join, the more the Distributors and
J&J will pay under the Settlements.
The Notice you received should have a unique subdivision registration code. The Attorney
General’s Office also sent your city or county a letter attaching this same registration code.
Cities or counties must visit www.nationalopioidsettlement.com and use that code to
register to receive participation agreements for the Settlements. You will then receive
information about how to submit your Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms
electronically via DocuSign. You must submit two forms, one for each Settlement.
2.How large are the Settlements?
Under the terms of the Settlements, the Distributors and J&J will provide up to $26 billion
to states, cities, and counties throughout the country. The Distributors will make payments
over a period of 18 years, and J&J will make payments over nine years.
3.Is there a deadline for cities and counties to join the Settlements?
Yes. Cities and counties should complete their Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms
by January 2, 2022. Cities and counties that join after that date risk reducing the entire
amount that goes to the State of Minnesota as well as having their own payments reduced.
2
4.How many Minnesota cities and counties are engaged in litigation against the
Distributors and J&J?
Twenty-six counties and seven cities have filed lawsuits against the Distributors and/or
J&J. Under the MN MOA (see additional information below), all 87 counties and every
city that meets the eligibility criteria would receive settlement payments regardless of
whether they filed lawsuits, but they must join the Settlements. The Settlements prohibit
payments to counties or cities that do not join the Settlements.
5.What is the status of these cases?
All Minnesota city and county cases have been consolidated for pretrial proceedings into a
Multi-District Litigation (MDL) in federal court in Cleveland, Ohio. The opioid MDL has
roughly 3,000 lawsuits from nearly every state. The lawsuits allege that opioid
manufacturers misrepresented the risks associated with prescription opioids; that opioid
distributors did not properly monitor shipments of prescription opioids to pharmacies
across the country; and that these actions contributed to the opioid epidemic that continues
to ravage Minnesota and the rest of the country. Until the Settlements are finalized, these
cases will remain pending.
6.Has the State of Minnesota joined the Settlements?
Yes. The Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, together with the majority of state
Attorneys General across the country, has signed on to the Settlements. Those Attorneys
General, lawyers representing thousands of municipalities in the national opioid litigation,
and the Association of Minnesota Counties, League of Minnesota Cities, and the Coalition
of Greater Minnesota Cities strongly encourage cities and counties to join. Cities and
counties that join will be helping to bring additional abatement resources to communities
and families throughout the state for substance use prevention, harm reduction, treatment,
and recovery.
7.How much will Minnesota receive from the Settlements?
Minnesota is eligible to receive a maximum payment of approximately $296 million under
the Settlements with the Distributors and J&J. The settlement funds are allocated among
states based on population and the impact of the opioid crisis on each state, taking into
account several public health measures. The precise amount of settlement funds Minnesota
as a whole receives is highly dependent on the level of city and county participation and
the avoidance of penalties that would result from cities or counties filing new lawsuits.
8.What is the Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement?
The MN MOA governs how Minnesota will distribute settlement funds from the
Settlements with Distributors and J&J. It also governs how opioid abatement funds from
the bankruptcy resolutions with Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt are distributed within
Minnesota. The Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt bankruptcies are not yet finalized, and
3
it is not yet known how much money will be coming to the state from these bankruptcies,
although the Attorney General’s Office expects the figure to be in the tens of millions.
9.Why is it so important to join the Settlements and the MN MOA?
The opioid epidemic has taken the lives of more than 5,400 Minnesotans since 2000. The
epidemic has torn families apart and ravaged communities, particularly American Indian
populations and communities of color. Individuals, families, and communities continue to
suffer, as the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a surge in both fatal and nonfatal overdose
deaths.
The epidemic was fueled by irresponsible marketing and inadequate monitoring on the part
of opioid makers and distributors. In addition to potentially over $296 million to fight the
epidemic, settlements with the Distributors and J&J will shine a light on these companies’
conduct and help make sure nothing like this ever happens again. The MN MOA is an
important step forward in holding these companies accountable and directing much-needed
resources to communities across the state.
10.What are the most important features of the MN MOA?
The Settlements require state and local governments to use the vast majority of settlement
funds to address the opioid epidemic. Consistent with this principle, the MN MOA
dedicates funds to that purpose. The Attorney General’s Office convened an expert panel
of local, state, and community providers with experience and expertise in public health and
delivery of health care services to determine the best and most effective use of the
settlement funds (the “Advisory Panel to the Attorney General on Distribution and
Allocation of Opioid Settlement Funds” or the “panel”). The panel selected a
comprehensive list of future opioid abatement and remediation programs to which these
settlement funds must be dedicated, whether those funds are received by the State, cities,
or counties.
The MN MOA also enables Minnesota to maximize resources to fight the epidemic. The
MN MOA was designed to incentivize cities and counties to join in order to earn the
maximum amount of payments from the Settlements. To maximize resources flowing to
communities on the front lines of the epidemic, the MN MOA directs settlement funds as
follows:
75 percent to local governments, including all counties and 33 cities.
25 percent to the state, to be overseen and distributed by the Opioid Epidemic
Response Advisory Council.
11. How does my city or county sign onto the MN MOA?
The county board, city council, or equivalent legislative body can pass a resolution stating
its intent to sign onto the MOA and directing the appropriate county or city official to
execute the MOA. Sample resolutions are available from the Association of Minnesota
Counties and the League of Minnesota Cities.
4
12.If my city or county signs onto the MN MOA, does that mean it automatically signs
onto the Settlements with the Distributors or J&J?
No. A city or county that signs the MN MOA is agreeing to a framework for how
settlement funds will flow in the event the Settlements become effective. However, the
city or county must separately sign on to the Settlements in order to receive payments
pursuant to the MN MOA.
13.If my city or county joins the Settlements, will we receive direct payments?
It depends. All counties that join are set to receive direct allocation under the terms of the
MN MOA, as well as all cities that join and meet the following eligibility criteria:
Have a population of 30,000 or more, based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Vintage
2019 population totals;
Have funded or otherwise managed an established health care or treatment
infrastructure (e.g., health department or similar agency); or
Have initiated litigation against the Distributors or J&J as of December 3, 2021.
The population threshold for non-litigating cities to receive a direct allocation of funds
recognizes that the efficient delivery of opioid abatement services is hindered if the funds
are divided into hundreds of small allocations. Even with potentially upwards of $300
million coming into Minnesota, allocating funds among several hundred smaller cities and
towns would result in minimal payments for most subdivisions, in many cases less than a
few dollars a year. For that same reason, under the MN MOA cities allocated a share may
elect to have their full share or a portion of their share instead directed to the county in
which the city is located.
Although not all cities will receive a direct allocation of opioid abatement funds, those
cities will still benefit from the opioid remediation efforts that take place in their
communities. Moreover, under the MN MOA, each county receiving opioid settlement
funds must consult annually with the cities in the county regarding use of the settlement
funds. Finally, cities that are not eligible for a direct share may also request grants for
opioid remediation programs from the state’s opioid remediation fund, which are
distributed via the Opioid Epidemic Response Advisory Council and the Department of
Human Services.
14.If my city or county joins, how much money will we receive?
Under the terms of the MN MOA, local governments (including cities and counties) that
join the Settlements will directly receive 75% of the total abatement funds, divided among
the counties and eligible cities in the percentages reflected in Exhibit B to the MN MOA.
The percentages reflected in Exhibit B are based upon the MDL’s Opioid Negotiation Class
Model. Experts and attorneys representing local governments in the MDL developed the
5
allocation model based on nationally available federal data on opioid use disorder,
overdose deaths, and opioid shipments into Minnesota, by region and community.
15.When will my city or county get payments?
Payments from the Settlements will begin to flow to the state and directly to cities and
counties as soon as April 2022. The Distributors will make payments over a period of 18
years, and J&J will make payments over nine years. The J&J settlement provides for
payments to be accelerated if cities and counties sign on early.
16.How much money will the State receive, and where will it go?
Under the terms of the MN MOA, the statewide abatement share is 25% of the total
abatement funds. By statute, these funds will go into a special opioid abatement account
and are designated to be used solely for opioid abatement purposes pursuant to the
Approved Uses in the MN MOA, overseen and distributed by the Opioid Epidemic
Response Advisory Council.1
17.What about attorney fees?
The state’s investigation and litigation against the opioid industry is handled by
government lawyers in the Attorney General’s Office. No money from these Settlements
will go to pay any state lawyers. Some cities and counties in Minnesota retained attorneys
on a contingency fee basis to file lawsuits against the opioid companies. The national
settlements establish an Attorney Fee Fund for attorneys representing cities and counties
that join the settlements. The settlements require attorneys who recover from this fund to
waive enforcement of their contingency fee agreements. The MN MOA includes a
Backstop Fund, which will be overseen by a Special Master, that will allow for the payment
of reasonable attorney fees to private attorneys to make up for the difference between what
they receive from the national fund and their contingency fee agreements, which are capped
at 15%. The Backstop Fund is funded by a percentage of the local government share of
settlement funds, and any funds that remain in the Backstop Fund after payment of
reasonable attorney fees will revert to cities and counties for abatement.
18.How will the money coming into Minnesota be tracked?
The Advisory Panel to the Attorney General on Distribution and Allocation of Opioid
Settlement Funds agreed upon a set of reporting and compliance recommendations to make
1 Under current law, after certain appropriations are made, approximately 50% of the funds paid
into the opioid abatement account are distributed to county social service agencies to provide child
protection services to children and families who are affected by addiction. The state-subdivision
agreement anticipates a change to this law to allow counties to receive their share of the settlement
funds directly. The agreement requires the state and subdivisions to work together to achieve this
change in law during the 2022 legislative session, and includes a provision changing the allocation
between state and local governments if the statutory change is not accomplished.
6
sure that the abatement money coming into Minnesota is effectively tracked and spent on
strategies and programs that have a real impact in the state. The MN MOA will be
supplemented to include provisions that will be mutually agreed upon by the State and
cities and counties utilizing the panel’s recommendations.
19.Can a city join the Settlements even if it does not receive a direct allocation of
abatement funds?
Yes. The Settlements allow for all cities and counties to join, even ones that are not directly
allocated amounts from the 75% local government share. For cities with populations
greater than 10,000, joining the Settlements will assist Minnesota in earning the maximum
amount possible.
Non-litigating cities with populations under 10,000 were not sent notices and are not able
to use the DocuSign process, but may still want to join the Settlements. If such cities want
to join the settlements, they can contact the Attorney General’s Office to receive the
subdivision joinder forms by emailing opioids@ag.state.mn.us.
20.Does the MN MOA apply to matters other than the Distributor and J&J Settlements?
Yes. The MN MOA replaces default provisions in the Purdue Pharma L.P. and
Mallinckrodt plc bankruptcy plans. The Attorney General’s Office anticipates that the
Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt bankruptcy proceedings will provide tens of millions of
additional dollars to Minnesota to support state and local efforts to address the opioid
epidemic across the state. These funds will be distributed throughout the state according
to the provisions MN MOA, just like the settlement funds from the Distributor and J&J
Settlements.
21.Do the Settlements require the companies to do more than pay money?
Yes. In addition to paying billions of dollars, the companies are also required to make
changes in how opioids are distributed and sold. The companies will be subject to far more
oversight and accountability throughout that process to prevent deliveries of opioids to
pharmacies where diversion and misuse occur. The Distributors will be required to
establish and fund a centralized, independent clearinghouse using detailed data analytics
to keep close track of opioid distribution throughout the country and raise red flags for
suspicious orders. J&J will be prohibited from selling or promoting opioids for ten years.
22.How do the Settlements and the MN MOA relate to the McKinsey settlement that was
announced in February?
The McKinsey settlement is separate from the Settlements with the Distributors and J&J,
and from the Purdue and Mallinckrodt bankruptcy proceedings.
In February 2021, Attorney General Keith Ellison and other attorneys general from across
the country reached a $573 million settlement with one of the world’s largest consulting
7
firms, McKinsey & Company, over the company’s role in advising opioid companies how
to promote their drugs and profit from the opioid epidemic.
As part of the settlement with McKinsey, Minnesota will receive nearly $8 million, $6.6
million of which has already been paid. The remainder will be paid over four years. The
entire settlement sum will be placed into the special opioid abatement account and used to
abate the opioid crisis in the state.
23.Apart from the Distributors and J&J Settlements, the Purdue and Mallinckrodt
bankruptcy proceedings, and the recent McKinsey settlement, is there other opioid-
related litigation brought by state and local governments?
Yes. In addition to these cases, the Attorney General’s Office continues to be engaged in
multistate investigations and settlement negotiations with numerous other pharmaceutical
manufacturers and distributors for violations of state consumer protection laws. The Office
is leading nationwide efforts to ensure public disclosure of opioid-related documents,
which are designed to achieve accountability, transparency, and prevention of future
harm. The Office is also coordinating with the Opioid Epidemic Response Advisory
Council to ensure any potential settlement funds are used as effectively as possible
throughout Minnesota to remedy the ongoing opioid crisis.
24.Where can I get more information about the Settlements?
Cities or counties that hired attorneys to file opioid litigation should consult their attorneys.
Additional information on the Settlements can be found at the national settlement website,
www.nationalopioidsettlement.com, or the Attorney General’s website:
www.ag.state.mn.us/opioids. To speak with someone on the Attorney General’s opioids
team, email opioids@ag.state.mn.us or call (612) 429-7126 and leave a voicemail.
December 8, 2021
Dear Minnesota Cities and Counties:
I’m pleased to announce that counties, cities, and the State of Minnesota have reached an agreement that
will govern how funds from recently announced settlements with opioid companies will be distributed within
Minnesota. In order to finalize this agreement, I am asking you to sign the enclosed State-Subdivision
Memorandum of Agreement (MN MOA) and also to join both settlements with opioid distributors McKesson,
AmerisourceBergen, and Cardinal Health, and opioid manufacturer Johnson & Johnson by January 2, 2022.
Minnesota stands to receive more than $300 million from these settlements, the vast majority of which will go to
cities and counties, but we need your cities and counties to sign on to the settlements to maximize the resources
to fight the epidemic. Simply put, the more cities and counties that sign on by January 2, 2022, the more money
we will have for treatment, prevention, and a whole host of programs and strategies to abate this crisis.
Over the last few months, my Office has been working tirelessly with cities and counties to come to an
agreement on allocation and distribution of opioid settlement funds. We have been working alongside the
Association of Minnesota Counties, the League of Minnesota Cities, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities,
representatives from litigating cities and counties, members of the Opioid Epidemic Response Advisory Council,
the Governor’s Office, and numerous state agencies, among others. The MN MOA is the result of this work.
Since 2000, the opioid epidemic has cost more than 5,400 Minnesotans their lives, and has torn families
apart and ravaged communities. The last year has been especially hard, as the COVID-19 pandemic has caused
a surge in opioid overdoses, both fatal and nonfatal. No amount of money will ever be enough to make up for the
damage and destruction caused by these companies, but these historic agreements are at least a measure of
accountability, if not justice.
Enclosed with this letter are several documents with more information about these agreements. Additional
information about the settlements and how they will be implemented in Minnesota can be found on our website
at www.ag.state.mn.us/opioids. Also, please do not hesitate to contact my Office with any questions you may
have. You can send an email to opioids@ag.state.mn.us, or leave a voicemail at (612) 429-7126.
Sincerely,
KEITH ELLISON
Attorney General
Enclosures: Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement
Executive Summary
One-Page Overview
Frequently Asked Questions
Checklist
Minnesota Opioid State-Subdivision Agreement Overview
What It Is
The Minnesota Memorandum of Agreement (MN MOA) governs how Minnesota will distribute
settlement funds from two national settlements with opioid distributors McKesson, Cardinal
Health, and AmerisourceBergen and opioid manufacturer Johnson & Johnson. These settlements
could bring more than $296 million to Minnesota over an 18-year period to support state and local
efforts to fight the opioid epidemic.1
How It Works
Enables Minnesota to maximize resources to fight the epidemic. For Minnesota to receive the
maximum payout under the two national settlements, cities and counties must join the state and
sign on to the MN MOA and the settlement agreements. To maximize resources flowing to
communities on the front lines of the epidemic, the MN MOA directs settlement funds as follows:
75 percent to local governments, including all counties and 33 cities.
25 percent to the state, to be overseen and distributed by the Opioid Epidemic Response
Advisory Council.
Dedicates funds to addressing the opioid epidemic. The Attorney General’s Office convened
an expert panel of local, state, and community providers with experience and expertise in public
health and delivery of health care services to determine the best and most effective use of the
settlement funds. The panel selected a comprehensive list of future opioid abatement and
remediation programs to which these settlement funds must be dedicated.
Why It Matters
Personal Cost. More than 5,400 Minnesotans have died of opioid overdoses since 2000. The
epidemic has torn families apart and ravaged communities, particularly American Indian
populations and communities of color. Individuals, families, and communities continue to suffer,
as the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a surge in both fatal and nonfatal overdose deaths.
Accountability. Opioid manufacturers and distributors created and fueled the opioid epidemic
with irresponsible and misleading marketing and inadequate monitoring of these dangerous
products. In addition to potentially over $296 million to fight the epidemic, settlements with the
three largest drug distributors in the country, as well as one of the largest manufacturers, will shine
a light on these companies’ conduct and help make sure nothing like this ever happens again.
1 The MN MOA also governs how opioid abatement funds from the bankruptcy resolutions with
Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt are distributed within Minnesota. The $296 million figure does
not include payments from the Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt bankruptcies, which are not yet
finalized.
Minnesota Opioid Settlement Executive Summary
Minnesota has joined a broad multistate coalition in reaching nationwide settlements with the three
largest opioid distributors – AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson – and opioid
manufacturer Johnson & Johnson. The settlements resolve investigations and lawsuits against
these companies for their role in the opioid crisis. If the settlements are fully adopted nationally,
the distributors will pay $21 billion over 18 years and Johnson & Johnson will pay $5 billion over
10 years. Most states have already joined the settlements, but for the agreements to become
effective, a critical mass of cities and counties must sign onto the settlements by January 2, 2022.
Settlement Structure
If a critical mass of subdivisions sign on and the settlements become effective:
Minnesota will be eligible to receive more than $296 million over 18 years. Up to $222
million of that will be paid directly to Minnesota cities and counties. The total amount of
payments to Minnesota will be determined by the overall degree of participation by cities
and counties. The more cities and counties that join, the more money everyone in
Minnesota will receive. Distribution within Minnesota will be determined by the state-
subdivision agreement (see below).
o Each state’s share of the funding was determined by agreement among the states
using a formula that takes into account the impact of the crisis on the state—the
number of overdose deaths, the number of residents with substance use disorder,
and the number of opioids prescribed—and the population of the state.
Payments will begin to flow to the state and cities and counties as soon as April 2022. The
Johnson & Johnson settlement provides for payments to be accelerated if cities and
counties sign on early.
The vast majority of the settlement funds must be used to support any of a wide variety of
strategies to fight the opioid crisis. The Attorney General’s Office convened an expert
panel of local, state, and community providers with experience and expertise in public
health and delivery of health care services to determine the best and most effective use of
the settlement funds. The panel selected a comprehensive list of future opioid abatement
and remediation programs that will benefit all regions of the state.
In addition to the financial components, the settlements also require the companies to make
changes in how opioids are distributed and sold. The companies will be subject to far more
oversight and accountability throughout that process to prevent deliveries of opioids to
pharmacies where diversion and misuse occur. The distributors will be required to
establish and fund a centralized, independent clearinghouse using detailed data analytics
to keep close track of opioid distribution throughout the country and raise red flags for
2
suspicious orders. Johnson & Johnson will be prohibited from selling or promoting opioids
for ten years.
Minnesota Framework
Minnesota has been preparing for these settlements and the opportunity they present to deliver
substantial funding to needed abatement and remediation programs. In 2019, the Legislature
passed the Opiate Epidemic Response bill, creating a special opioid abatement account and the
Opioid Epidemic Response Advisory Council, which will oversee the spending of the state’s
share of settlement funds.
Additionally, a months-long partnership between the state and cities and counties has resulted in
a state-subdivision agreement (or “Minnesota Memorandum of Agreement”) that is designed to
maximize the settlement funds coming to the State of Minnesota and get them to where they are
needed most. The state-subdivision agreement details how the settlement money will be
allocated within the state and also sets out a structure for the distribution of opioid abatement
funds from pending bankruptcy plans with Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt. A copy of the
state-subdivision agreement can be found on the Attorney General’s website at
www.ag.state.mn.us/opioids.
Pursuant to the state-subdivision agreement—and assuming maximum payments—
approximately $296 million in funds paid to Minnesota and its cities and counties from the
Distributor and Johnson & Johnson settlements, as well as tens of millions of additional dollars
from the Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt bankruptcies, will be allocated as follows:
Local Government Abatement Fund. Seventy-five percent (75%) of the abatement
funds will be paid directly to counties and certain municipalities that participate in the
settlement. Local government funds will be directly allocated to all participating
counties, and all participating municipalities that: (a) have populations of 30,000 or more,
(b) have filed lawsuits against the settling defendants, or (c) have public health
departments. To promote efficiency in the use of abatement funds and limit the
administratively burdensome disbursements of amounts that are too small to add a
meaningful abatement response, smaller, non-litigating municipalities will not receive a
direct allocation of settlement funds. The allocation percentages for each county and
municipality were determined by counsel for the subdivisions negotiating the national
settlement agreements and were calculated using data reflect the impact of the opioid
crisis on the subdivision.
State Fund. Twenty-five percent (25) of the abatement funds will be paid directly to the
State. Pursuant to state law, these funds will go into the special opioid abatement account
to be overseen and distributed by the Opioid Epidemic Response Advisory Council.
Under current law, after certain appropriations are made, approximately 50% of the funds
paid into the opioid abatement account are distributed to county social service agencies to
provide child protection services to children and families who are affected by addiction.
3
The state-subdivision agreement anticipates a change to this law to allow counties to
receive their share of the settlement funds directly. The agreement requires the state and
subdivisions to work together to achieve this change in law during the 2022 legislative
session, and includes a provision changing the allocation between state and local
governments if the statutory change is not accomplished.
Some municipalities in Minnesota retained attorneys on a contingency fee basis to file lawsuits
against the opioid companies. The national settlements establish an Attorney Fee Fund for
attorneys representing cities and counties that join the settlements. The settlements require
attorneys who recover from this fund to waive enforcement of their contingency fee agreements.
The state-subdivision agreement includes a Backstop Fund, which will be overseen by a Special
Master, that will allow for the payment of reasonable attorney fees to private attorneys to make
up for the difference between what they receive from the national fund and their contingency fee
agreements, which are capped at 15%. Any funds that remain in the Backstop Fund after
payment of reasonable attorney fees will revert to cities and counties for abatement.
Subdivision Participation
It is vital for subdivisions to join the settlements during the initial sign-on period, which ends
January 2, 2022. First, very high levels of subdivision participation nationally are necessary for
the companies to move forward with the settlements and for everyone to benefit from them.
Second, cities or counties cannot receive any portion of the direct settlement funds if they do not
sign on to the settlements. Third, in order to maximize the settlement payments that come to
Minnesota, full joinder by certain categories of counties and cities is needed. Finally, joinder
during the initial sign-on period maximizes the amount of funds available to an individual city or
county.
Next Steps
Now: Cities and counties should have received a settlement notice with additional information
about the sign on process, which begins by registering on the national settlement website:
www.nationalopioidsettlement.com. Registering is a necessary step toward participation in the
settlements. The notice each subdivision received by mail and email provides its unique
subdivision registration code, which must be used to register. Registering does not mean that the
subdivision has accepted the terms of the national settlement agreements or the state-subdivision
agreement.
Next: Each subdivision, via its local legislative body, should adopt a resolution that authorizes a
representative of the subdivision to execute Minnesota’s state-subdivision agreement and both
subdivision settlement participation forms (Distributors and Johnson & Johnson), which are
required to join the settlements. Cities and counties can obtain model resolutions by contacting
the Association of Minnesota Counties or the League of Minnesota Cities. The resolutions
should be submitted to the subdivisions’ legislative body (i.e., county commission or city
council) for approval.
4
By January 2, 2022: After the appropriate resolution is passed by each subdivision, the
authorized representative should sign the Minnesota Memorandum of Agreement, the Distributor
Agreement, and the Johnson & Johnson Agreement. The Distributor and Johnson & Johnson
agreements can be signed electronically via DocuSign. Subdivisions should receive an email
with a link to sign electronically upon registering at www.nationalopioidsettlement.com.
Subdivisions are encouraged to sign onto the Minnesota Memorandum of Agreement and the
settlement agreements as soon as possible to avoid scheduling challenges and to ensure that we
meet the national subdivision participation threshold for the settlements to become effective.
Additional information about the settlements and how they are implemented in Minnesota can be
found on the Attorney General’s website: www.ag.state.mn.us/opioids. Subdivisions that are
represented by an attorney with respect to opioid claims should consult with their attorney.
Additionally, specific questions for the Attorney General’s Office can be emailed to
opioids@ag.state.mn.us, or left via voicemail at (612) 429-7126.
Minnesota Opioids Settlement Checklist
Cities and counties must complete the following steps:
☐Register your city or county on the national settlement website:
www.nationalopioidsettlement.com.
a.Notice with a unique registration code was sent to cities and counties in late
September. If your city or county did not receive this notice or cannot find its
unique registration code and wishes to participate in the settlements, contact the
Attorney General’s Office.
b.Once registered, your designated contact will receive settlement participation
packets, including two (2) Subdivision Settlement Participation Forms – one for
each of the Distributors and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) settlements. The
settlement sign-on forms can be completed electronically via DocuSign.
☐Adopt a county board or city council resolution authorizing a representative of the
subdivision to execute the following:
a.The Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement (MN
MOA)
b.The Distributor Subdivision Settlement Participation Form
c.The Janssen Subdivision Settlement Participation Form
☐Have the authorized representative execute the following documents:
a.The MN MOA
b. The Distributor Subdivision Settlement Participation Form (via DocuSign)
c.The Janssen Subdivision Settlement Participation Form (via DocuSign)
☐Return the following documents to the Attorney General’s Office by email to
opioids@ag.state.mn.us:
a.Copy of the completed resolution passed by your city or county
b. Executed signature page for the MN MOA
Additional information about the settlements and how they are implemented in Minnesota can be
found on the Attorney General’s website: www.ag.state.mn.us/opioids. Subdivisions that are
represented by an attorney with respect to opioid claims should consult with their attorney.
Additionally, specific questions for the Attorney General’s Office can be emailed to
opioids@ag.state.mn.us, or left via voicemail at (612) 429-7126.
1
MINNESOTA OPIOIDS STATE-SUBDIVISION MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, Minnesota counties and cities, and their people have been
harmed by misconduct committed by certain entities that engage in or have engaged in the manufacture, marketing, promotion, distribution, or dispensing of an opioid analgesic;
WHEREAS, certain Minnesota counties and cities, through their counsel, and the State, through
its Attorney General, are separately engaged in ongoing investigations, litigation, and settlement
discussions seeking to hold opioid manufacturers and distributors accountable for the damage caused by their misconduct;
WHEREAS, the State and Local Governments share a common desire to abate and alleviate the
impacts of the misconduct described above throughout Minnesota;
WHEREAS, while the State and Local Governments recognize the sums which may be available from the aforementioned litigation will likely be insufficient to fully abate the public health crisis caused by the opioid epidemic, they share a common interest in dedicating the most resources
possible to the abatement effort;
WHEREAS, the investigations and litigation with Johnson & Johnson, AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson have resulted in National Settlement Agreements with those companies, which the State has already committed to join;
WHEREAS, Minnesota’s share of settlement funds from the National Settlement Agreements will be maximized only if all Minnesota counties, and cities of a certain size, participate in the settlements;
WHEREAS, the National Settlement Agreements will set a default allocation between each state
and its political subdivisions unless they enter into a state-specific agreement regarding the distribution and use of settlement amounts;
WHEREAS, this Memorandum of Agreement is intended to facilitate compliance by the State
and by the Local Governments with the terms of the National Settlement Agreements and is
intended to serve as a State-Subdivision Agreement under the National Settlement Agreements;
WHEREAS, this Memorandum of Agreement is also intended to serve as a State-Subdivision Agreement under resolutions of claims concerning alleged misconduct in the manufacture,
marketing, promotion, distribution, or dispensing of an opioid analgesic entered in bankruptcy
court that provide for payments (including payments through a trust) to both the State and Minnesota counties and cities and allow for the allocation between a state and its political subdivisions to be set through a state-specific agreement; and
WHEREAS, specifically, this Memorandum of Agreement is intended to serve under the
Bankruptcy Resolutions concerning Purdue Pharma and Mallinckrodt as a qualifying Statewide Abatement Agreement.
2
I.Definitions
As used in this MOA (including the preamble above):
“Approved Uses” shall mean forward-looking strategies, programming, and services toabate the opioid epidemic that fall within the list of uses on Exhibit A. Consistent withthe terms of the National Settlement Agreements and Bankruptcy Resolutions, “Approved
Uses” shall include the reasonable administrative expenses associated with overseeing and
administering Opioid Settlement Funds. Reimbursement by the State or LocalGovernments for past expenses are not Approved Uses.
“Backstop Fund” is defined in Section VI.B below.
“Bankruptcy Defendants” mean Purdue Pharma L.P. and Mallinckrodt plc.
“Bankruptcy Resolution(s)” means resolutions of claims concerning alleged misconduct inmanufacture, marketing, promotion, distribution, or dispensing of an opioid analgesic by
the Bankruptcy Defendants entered in bankruptcy court that provide for payments
(including payments through a trust) to both the State and Minnesota counties andmunicipalities and allow for the allocation between the state and its political subdivisionsto be set through a state-specific agreement.
“Counsel” is defined in Section VI.B below.
“County Area” shall mean a county in the State of Minnesota plus the Local Governments,or portion of any Local Government, within that county.
“Governing Body” means (1) for a county, the county commissioners of the county, and
(2) for a municipality, the elected city council or the equivalent legislative body for themunicipality.
“Legislative Modification” is defined in Section II.C below.
“Litigating Local Governments” mean a Local Government that filed an opioid lawsuit(s) on or before December 3, 2021, as defined in Section VI.B below.
“Local Abatement Funds” are defined in Section II.B below.
“Local Government” means all counties and cities within the geographic boundaries of the state of Minnesota.
“MDL Matter” means the matter captioned In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation,
MDL 2804, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.
“Memorandum of Agreement” or “MOA” mean this agreement, the Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement.
3
“National Settlement Agreements” means the national opioid settlement agreements with
the Parties and one or all of the Settling Defendants concerning alleged misconduct in
manufacture, marketing, promotion, distribution, or dispensing of an opioid analgesic. “Opioid Settlement Funds” shall mean all funds allocated by the National Settlement Agreements and any Bankruptcy Resolutions to the State and Local Governments for
purposes of opioid remediation activities or restitution, as well as any repayment of those
funds and any interest or investment earnings that may accrue as those funds are temporarily held before being expended on opioid remediation strategies. “Opioid Supply Chain Participants” means entities that engage in or have engaged in the
manufacture, marketing, promotion, distribution, or dispensing of an opioid analgesic,
including their officers, directors, employees, or agents, acting in their capacity as such. “Parties” means the State and the Participating Local Governments.
“Participating Local Government” means a county or city within the geographic boundaries
of the State of Minnesota that has signed this Memorandum of Agreement and has executed a release of claims with the Settling Defendants by signing on to the National Settlement Agreements. For the avoidance of doubt, a Local Government must sign this MOA to become a “Participating Local Government.”
“Region” is defined in Section II.H below. “Settling Defendants” means Johnson & Johnson, AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and McKesson, as well as their subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, and directors named in a
National Settlement Agreement.
“State” means the State of Minnesota by and through its Attorney General, Keith Ellison. “State Abatement Fund” is defined in Section II.B below.
II. Allocation of Settlement Proceeds A. Method of distribution. Pursuant to the National Settlement Agreements and any Bankruptcy Resolutions, Opioid Settlement Funds shall be distributed directly to the State
and directly to Participating Local Governments in such proportions and for such uses as
set forth in this MOA, provided Opioid Settlement Funds shall not be considered funds of the State or any Participating Local Government unless and until such time as each annual distribution is made.
B. Overall allocation of funds. Opioid Settlement Funds will be initially allocated as follows:
(i) 25% directly to the State (“State Abatement Fund”), and (ii) 75% directly to abatement funds established by Participating Local Governments (“Local Abatement Funds”). This initial allocation is subject to modification by Sections II.F, II.G, and II.H, below.
4
C. Statutory change.
1. The Parties agree to work together in good faith to propose and lobby for legislation in the 2022 Minnesota legislative session to modify the distribution of the State’s Opiate Epidemic Response Fund under Minnesota Statutes section 256.043, subd. 3(d), so that “50 percent of the remaining amount” is no longer appropriated
to county social services, as related to Opioid Settlement Funds that are ultimately
placed into the Minnesota Opiate Epidemic Response Fund (“Legislative Modification”).1 Such efforts include, but are not limited to, providing testimony and letters in support of the Legislative Modification.
2. It is the intent of the Parties that the Legislative Modification would affect only the
county share under section 256.043, subd. 3(d), and would not impact the provision of funds to tribal social service agencies. Further, it is the intent of the Parties that the Legislative Modification would relate only to disposition of Opioid Settlement Funds and is not predicated on a change to the distribution of the Board of
Pharmacy fee revenue that is deposited into the Opiate Epidemic Response Fund.
D. Bill Drafting Workgroup. The Parties will work together to convene a Bill Drafting Workgroup to recommend draft legislation to achieve this Legislative Modification. The Workgroup will meet as often as practicable in December 2021 and January 2022 until
recommended language is completed. Invitations to participate in the group shall be
extended to the League of Minnesota Cities, the Association of Minnesota Counties, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, state agencies, the Governor’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office, the Opioid Epidemic Response Advisory Council, the Revisor’s Office, and Minnesota tribal representatives. The Workgroup will host meetings with Members of
the Minnesota House of Representatives and Minnesota Senate who have been involved in
this matter to assist in crafting a bill draft. E. No payments until August 1, 2022. The Parties agree to take all steps necessary to ensure that any Opioid Settlement Funds ready for distribution directly to the State and
Participating Local Governments under the National Settlement Agreements or
Bankruptcy Resolutions are not actually distributed to the Parties until on or after August 1, 2022, in order to allow the Parties to pursue legislative change that would take effect before the Opioid Settlement Funds are received by the Parties. Such steps may include, but are not limited to, the Attorney General’s Office delaying its filing of Consent
Judgments in Minnesota state court memorializing the National Settlement Agreements.
This provision will cease to apply upon the effective date of the Legislative Modification described above, if that date is prior to August 1, 2022.
1 It is the intent of the Parties that counties will continue to fund child protection services for
children and families who are affected by addiction, in compliance with the Approved Uses in Exhibit A.
5
F.Effect of no statutory change by August 1, 2022. If the Legislative Modification describedabove does not take effect by August 1, 2022, the allocation between the Parties set forth
in Section II.B shall be modified as follows: (i) 40% directly to the State Abatement Fund,
and (ii) 60% to Local Abatement Funds. The Parties further agree to discuss potentialamendment of this MOA if such legislation does not timely go into effect in accordancewith this paragraph.
G.Effect of later statutory change. If the Legislative Modification described above takes
effect after August 1, 2022, the allocation between the Parties will be modified as follows:(i) 25% directly to the State Abatement Fund, and (ii) 75% to Local Abatement Funds.
H.Effect of partial statutory change. If any legislative action otherwise modifies or
diminishes the direct allocation of Opioid Settlement Funds to Participating Local
Governments so that as a result the Participating Local Governments would receive lessthan 75 percent of the Opioid Settlement Funds (inclusive of amounts received by countiesper statutory appropriation through the Minnesota Opiate Epidemic Response Fund), thenthe allocation set forth in Section II.B will be modified to ensure Participating Local
Governments receive 75% of the Opioid Settlement Funds.
I.Participating Local Governments receiving payments. The proportions set forth inExhibit B provide for payments directly to: (i) all Minnesota counties; and (ii) allMinnesota cities that (a) have a population of more than 30,000, based on the United States
Census Bureau’s Vintage 2019 population totals, (b) have funded or otherwise managed
an established health care or treatment infrastructure (e.g., health department or similaragency), or (c) have initiated litigation against the Settling Defendants as of December 3,2021.
J.Allocation of funds between Participating Local Governments. The Local Abatement
Funds shall be allocated to Participating Local Governments in such proportions as setforth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which is basedupon the MDL Matter’s Opioid Negotiation Class Model.2 The proportions shall notchange based on population changes during the term of the MOA. However, to the extent
required by the terms of the National Settlement Agreements, the proportions set forth inExhibit B must be adjusted: (i) to provide no payment from the National SettlementAgreements to any listed county or municipality that does not participate in the NationalSettlement Agreements; and (ii) to provide a reduced payment from the NationalSettlement Agreements to any listed county or city that signs on to the National Settlement
Agreements after the Initial Participation Date.
K.Redistribution in certain situations. In the event a Participating Local Government merges,dissolves, or ceases to exist, the allocation percentage for that Participating Local
2 More specifically, the proportions in Exhibit B were created based on Exhibit G to the National
Settlement Agreements, which in turn was based on the MDL Matter’s allocation criteria. Cities
under 30,000 in population that had shares under the Exhibit G default allocation were removed and their shares were proportionally reallocated amongst the remaining subdivisions.
6
Government shall be redistributed equitably based on the composition of the successor Local Government. In the event an allocation to a Local Government cannot be paid to the
Local Government, such unpaid allocations will be allocated to Local Abatement Funds
and be distributed in such proportions as set forth in Exhibit B.
L.City may direct payments to county. Any city allocated a share may elect to have its fullshare or a portion of its full share of current or future annual distributions of settlement
funds instead directed to the county or counties in which it is located, so long as that county
or counties are Participating Local Governments[s]. Such an election must be made byJanuary 1 each year to apply to the following fiscal year. If a city is located in more thanone county, the city’s funds will be directed based on the MDL Matter’s OpioidNegotiation Class Model.
III.Special Revenue Fund
A.Creation of special revenue fund. Every Participating Local Government receiving OpioidSettlement Funds through direct distribution shall create a separate special revenue fund,
as described below, that is designated for the receipt and expenditure of Opioid Settlement
Funds.
B.Procedures for special revenue fund. Funds in this special revenue fund shall not becommingled with any other money or funds of the Participating Local Government. The
funds in the special revenue fund shall not be used for any loans or pledge of assets, unless
the loan or pledge is for an Approved Use. Participating Local Governments may notassign to another entity their rights to receive payments of Opioid Settlement Funds or theirresponsibilities for funding decisions, except as provided in Section II.L.
C.Process for drawing from special revenue funds.
1. Opioid Settlement Funds can be used for a purpose when the Governing Bodyincludes in its budget or passes a separate resolution authorizing the expenditure ofa stated amount of Opioid Settlement Funds for that purpose or those purposes
during a specified period of time.
2.The budget or resolution must (i) indicate that it is an authorization for expendituresof opioid settlement funds; (ii) state the specific strategy or strategies the county orcity intends to fund, using the item letter and/or number in Exhibit A to identify
each funded strategy, if applicable; and (iii) state the amount dedicated to each
strategy for a stated period of time.
D.Local government grantmaking. Participating Local Governments may make contractswith or grants to a nonprofit, charity, or other entity with Opioid Settlement Funds.
E.Interest earned on special revenue fund. The funds in the special revenue fund may beinvested, consistent with the investment limitations for local governments, and may be
7
placed in an interest-bearing bank account. Any interest earned on the special revenue funds must be used in a way that is consistent with this MOA.
IV.Opioid Remediation Activities
A.Limitation on use of funds. This MOA requires that Opioid Settlement Funds be utilizedonly for future opioid remediation activities, and Parties shall expend Opioid Settlement
Funds only for Approved Uses and for expenditures incurred after the effective date of this
MOA, unless execution of the National Settlement Agreements requires a later date.Opioid Settlement Funds cannot be used to pay litigation costs, expenses, or attorney feesarising from the enforcement of legal claims related to the opioid epidemic, except for theportion of Opioid Settlement Funds that comprise the Backstop Fund described in Section
VI. For the avoidance of doubt, counsel for Litigating Local Governments may recover
litigation costs, expenses, or attorney fees from the common benefit, contingency fee, andcost funds established in the National Settlement Agreements, as well as the Backstop Funddescribed in Section VI.
B.Public health departments as Chief Strategists. For Participating Local Governments that
have public health departments, the public health departments shall serve as the leadagency and Chief Strategist to identify, collaborate, and respond to local issues as LocalGovernments decide how to leverage and disburse Opioid Settlement Funds. In their roleas Chief Strategist, public health departments will convene multi-sector meetings and lead
efforts that build upon local efforts like Community Health Assessments and Community
Health Improvement Plans, while fostering community focused and collaborativeevidence-informed approaches that prevent and address addiction across the areas of publichealth, human services, and public safety. Chief Strategists should consult withmunicipalities located within their county in the development of any Community Health
Assessment, and are encouraged to collaborate with law enforcement agencies in the
county where appropriate.
C.Administrative expenses. Reasonable administrative costs for the State or LocalGovernment to administer its allocation of the Opioid Settlement Funds shall not exceed
actual costs, 10% of the relevant allocation of the Opioid Settlement Funds, or any
administrative expense limitation imposed by the National Settlement Agreements orBankruptcy Resolution, whichever is less.
D.Regions. Two or more Participating Local Governments may at their discretion form a
new group or utilize an existing group (“Region”) to pool their respective shares of
settlement funds and make joint spending decisions. Participating Local Governments maychoose to create a Region or utilize an existing Region under a joint exercise of powersunder Minn. Stat. § 471.59.
E.Consultation and partnerships.
1.Each county receiving Opioid Settlement Funds must consult annually with themunicipalities in the county regarding future use of the settlement funds in the
8
county, including by holding an annual meeting with all municipalities in the county in order to receive input as to proposed uses of the Opioid Settlement Funds
and to encourage collaboration between Local Governments both within and
beyond the county. These meetings shall be open to the public.
2.Participating Local Governments within the same County Area have a duty toregularly consult with each other to coordinate spending priorities.
3.Participating Local Governments can form partnerships at the local level wherebyParticipating Local Governments dedicate a portion of their Opioid SettlementFunds to support city- or community-based work with local stakeholders andpartners within the Approved Uses.
F.Collaboration. The State and Participating Local Governments must collaborate topromote effective use of Opioid Settlement Funds, including through the sharing ofexpertise, training, and technical assistance. They will also coordinate with trustedpartners, including community stakeholders, to collect and share information about
successful regional and other high-impact strategies and opioid treatment programs.
V.Reporting and Compliance
A.Construction of reporting and compliance provisions. Reporting and compliance
requirements will be developed and mutually agreed upon by the Parties, utilizing the
recommendations provided by the Advisory Panel to the Attorney General on Distributionand Allocation of Opioid Settlement Funds.
B.Reporting Workgroup. The Parties will work together to establish a Reporting Workgroup
that includes representatives of the Attorney General’s Office, state stakeholders, and city
and county representatives, who will meet on a regular basis to develop reporting andcompliance recommendations. The Reporting Workgroup must produce a set of reportingand compliance measures by June 1, 2022. Such reporting and compliance measures willbe effective once approved by representatives of the Attorney General’s Office, the
Governor’s Office, the Association of Minnesota Counties, and the League of Minnesota
Cities that are on the Workgroup.
VI.Backstop Fund
A.National Attorney Fee Fund. The National Settlement Agreements provide for the payment
of all or a portion of the attorney fees and costs owed by Litigating Local Governments toprivate attorneys specifically retained to file suit in the opioid litigation (“NationalAttorney Fee Fund”). The Parties acknowledge that the National Settlement Agreementsmay provide for a portion of the attorney fees of Litigating Local Governments.
B.Backstop Fund and Waiver of Contingency Fee. The Parties agree that the Participating
Local Governments will create a supplemental attorney fees fund (the “Backstop Fund”)
to be used to compensate private attorneys (“Counsel”) for Local Governments that filedopioid lawsuits on or before December 3, 2021 (“Litigating Local Governments”). By
9
order3 dated August 6, 2021, Judge Polster capped all applicable contingent fee agreements at 15%. Judge Polster’s 15% cap does not limit fees from the National Attorney Fee Fund
or from any state backstop fund for attorney fees, but private attorneys for local
governments must waive their contingent fee agreements to receive payment from the National Attorney Fee Fund. Judge Polster recognized that a state backstop fund can be designed to incentivize private attorneys to waive their right to enforce contingent fee agreements and instead apply to the National Attorney Fee Fund, with the goals of
achieving greater subdivision participation and higher ultimate payouts to both states and
local governments. Accordingly, in order to seek payment from the Backstop Fund, Counsel must agree to waive their contingency fee agreements relating to these National Settlement Agreements and first apply to the National Attorney Fee Fund.
C.Backstop Fund Source. The Backstop Fund will be funded by seven percent (7%) of the
share of each payment made to the Local Abatement Funds from the National Settlement
Agreements (annual or otherwise), based upon the initial allocation of 25% directly to theState Abatement Fund and 75% directly to Local Abatement Funds, and will not includepayments resulting from the Purdue or Mallinckrodt Bankruptcies. In the event that theinitial allocation is modified pursuant to Section II.F. above, then the Backstop Fund will
be funded by 8.75% of the share of each payment made to the Local Abatement Funds
from the National Settlement Agreements (annual or otherwise), based upon the modifiedallocation of 40% directly to the State Abatement Fund and 60% directly to the LocalAbatement Funds, and will not include payments resulting from the Purdue or MallinckrodtBankruptcies. In the event that the allocation is modified pursuant to Section II.G. or
Section II.H. above, back to an allocation of 25% directly to the State Abatement Fund and
75% directly to Local Abatement Funds, then the Backstop Fund will be funded by 7% ofthe share of each payment made to the Local Abatement Funds from the NationalSettlement Agreements (annual or otherwise), and will not include payments resulting fromthe Purdue or Mallinckrodt Bankruptcies.
D.Backstop Fund Payment Cap. Any attorney fees paid from the Backstop Fund, together
with any compensation received from the National Settlement Agreements’ ContingencyFee Fund, shall not exceed 15% of the total gross recovery of the Litigating LocalGovernments’ share of funds from the National Settlement Agreements. To avoid doubt,in no instance will Counsel receive more than 15% of the amount paid to their respective
Litigating Local Government client(s) when taking into account what private attorneys
receive from both the Backstop Fund and any fees received from the National SettlementAgreements’ Contingency Fee Fund.
E.Requirements to Seek Payment from Backstop Fund. A private attorney may seek paymentfrom the Backstop Fund in the event that funds received by Counsel from the National
Settlement Agreements’ Contingency Fee Fund are insufficient to cover the amount that
would be due to Counsel under any contingency fee agreement with a Litigating LocalGovernment based on any recovery Litigating Local Governments receive from theNational Settlement Agreements. Before seeking any payment from the Backstop Fund,
3 Order, In re: Nat’l Prescription Opiate Litig., Case No. 17-MD-02804, Doc. No. 3814 (N.D. Ohio August 6, 2021).
10
private attorneys must certify that they first sought fees from the National Settlement Agreements’ Contingency Fee Fund, and must certify that they agreed to accept the
maximum fees payments awarded to them. Nothing in this Section, or in the terms of this
Agreement, shall be construed as a waiver of fees, contractual or otherwise, with respect to fees that may be recovered under a contingency fee agreement or otherwise from other past or future settlements, verdicts, or recoveries related to the opioid litigation.
F.Special Master. A special master will administer the Backstop Fund, including overseeing
any distribution, evaluating the requests of Counsel for payment, and determining the
appropriate amount of any payment from the Backstop Fund. The special master will beselected jointly by the Minnesota Attorney General and the Hennepin County Attorney,and will be one of the following individuals: Hon. Jeffrey Keyes, Hon. David Lillehaug;or Hon. Jack Van de North. The special master will be compensated from the Backstop
Fund. In the event that a successor special master is needed, the Minnesota Attorney
General and the Hennepin County Attorney will jointly select the successor special masterfrom the above-listed individuals. If none of the above-listed individuals is available toserve as the successor special master, then the Minnesota Attorney General and theHennepin County Attorney will jointly select a successor special master from a list of
individuals that is agreed upon between the Minnesota Attorney General, the Hennepin
County Attorney, and Counsel.
G.Special Master Determinations. The special master will determine the amount and timingof any payment to Counsel from the Backstop Fund. The special master shall make onedetermination regarding payment of attorney fees to Counsel, which will apply through the
term of the recovery from the National Settlement Agreements. In making such
determinations, the special master shall consider the amounts that have been or will bereceived by the private attorney’s firm from the National Settlement Agreements’Contingency Fee Fund relating to Litigating Local Governments; the contingency feecontracts; the dollar amount of recovery for Counsel’s respective clients who are Litigating
Local Governments; the Backstop Fund Payment Cap above; the complexity of the legal
issues involved in the opioid litigation; work done to directly benefit the LocalGovernments within the State of Minnesota; and the principles set forth in the MinnesotaRules of Professional Conduct, including the reasonable and contingency fee principles ofRule 1.5. In the interest of transparency, Counsel shall provide information in their initial
fee application about the total amount of fees that Counsel have received or will receive
from the National Attorney Fee Fund related to the Litigating Local Governments.
H.Special Master Proceedings. Counsel seeking payment from the Backstop Fund may alsoprovide written submissions to the special master, which may include declarations fromcounsel, summaries relating to the factors described above, and/or attestation regarding
total payments awarded or anticipated from the National Settlement Agreements’
Contingency Fee Fund. Private attorneys shall not be required to disclose work product,proprietary or confidential information, including but not limited to detailed billing orlodestar records. To the extent that counsel rely upon written submissions to support theirapplication to the special master, the special master will incorporate said submission or
summary into the record. Any proceedings before the special master and documents filed
with the special master shall be public, and the special master’s determinations regarding
11
any payment from the Backstop Funds shall be transparent, public, final, and not appealable.
I. Distribution of Any Excess Funds. To the extent the special master determines that the
Backstop Fund exceeds the amount necessary for payment to Counsel, the special master shall distribute any excess amount to Participating Local Governments according to the percentages set forth in Exhibit B.
J. Term. The Backstop Fund will be administered for (a) the length of the National Litigation
Settlement payments; or (b) until all Counsel for Litigating Local Governments have either
(i) received payments equal to the Backstop Fund Payment Cap above or (ii) received the full amount determined by the special master; whichever occurs first.
K. No State Funds Toward Attorney Fees. For the avoidance of doubt, no portion of the State Abatement Fund will be used to fund the Backstop Fund or in any other way to fund any
Litigating Local Government’s attorney fees and expenses. Any funds that the State
receives from the National Settlement Agreements as attorney fees and costs or in lieu of attorney fees and costs, including the Additional Restitution Amounts, will be treated as State Abatement Funds.
VII. General Terms
A. Scope of agreement. This MOA applies to all settlements under the National Settlement Agreements with Settling Defendants and the Bankruptcy Resolutions with Bankruptcy Defendants.4 The Parties agree to discuss the use, as the Parties may deem appropriate in the future, of the settlement terms set out herein (after any necessary amendments) for
resolutions with Opioid Supply Chain Participants not covered by the National Settlement
Agreements or a Bankruptcy Resolution. The Parties acknowledge that this MOA does not excuse any requirements placed upon them by the terms of the National Settlement Agreements or any Bankruptcy Resolution, except to the extent those terms allow for a State-Subdivision Agreement to do so.
B. When MOA takes effect. 1. This MOA shall become effective at the time a sufficient number of Local Governments have joined the MOA to qualify this MOA as a State-Subdivision
Agreement under the National Settlement Agreements or as a Statewide Abatement
Agreement under any Bankruptcy Resolution. If this MOA does not thereby qualify as a State-Subdivision Agreement or Statewide Abatement Agreement, this MOA will have no effect.
2. The Parties may conditionally agree to sign on to the MOA through a letter of intent,
resolution, or similar written statement, declaration, or pronouncement declaring
4 For the avoidance of doubt, this includes settlements reached with AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal
Health, and McKesson, and Janssen, and Bankruptcy Resolutions involving Purdue Pharma L.P., and Mallinckrodt plc.
12
their intent to sign on to the MOA if the threshold for Party participation in a specific Settlement is achieved.
C.Dispute resolution.
1.If any Party believes another Party has violated the terms of this MOA, the allegingParty may seek to enforce the terms of this MOA in Ramsey County District Court,
provided the alleging Party first provides notice to the alleged offending Party of
the alleged violation and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation.
2.If a Party believes another Party, Region, or individual involved in the receipt,distribution, or administration of Opioid Settlement Funds has violated any
applicable ethics codes or rules, a complaint shall be lodged with the appropriate
forum for handling such matters.
3.If a Party believes another Party, Region, or individual involved in the receipt,distribution, or administration of Opioid Settlement Funds violated any Minnesota
criminal law, such conduct shall be reported to the appropriate criminal authorities.
D.Amendments. The Parties agree to make such amendments as necessary to implement theintent of this MOA.
E.Applicable law and venue. Unless otherwise required by the National Settlement
Agreements or a Bankruptcy Resolution, this MOA, including any issues related tointerpretation or enforcement, is governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Anyaction related to the provisions of this MOA must be adjudicated by the Ramsey CountyDistrict Court. If any provision of this MOA is held invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, this invalidity does not affect any other provision which can be given effect
without the invalid provision.
F.Relationship of this MOA to other agreements and resolutions. All Parties acknowledgeand agree that the National Settlement Agreements will require a Participating Local
Government to release all its claims against the Settling Defendants to receive direct
allocation of Opioid Settlement Funds. All Parties further acknowledge and agree thatbased on the terms of the National Settlement Agreements, a Participating LocalGovernment may receive funds through this MOA only after complying with allrequirements set forth in the National Settlement Agreements to release its claims. This
MOA is not a promise from any Party that any National Settlement Agreements or
Bankruptcy Resolution will be finalized or executed.
G.When MOA is no longer in effect. This MOA is effective until one year after the last dateon which any Opioid Settlement Funds are being spent by the Parties pursuant to the
National Settlement Agreements and any Bankruptcy Resolution.
H.No waiver for failure to exercise. The failure of a Party to exercise any rights under thisMOA will not be deemed to be a waiver of any right or any future rights.
13
I.No effect on authority of Parties. Nothing in this MOA should be construed to limit the
power or authority of the State of Minnesota, the Attorney General, or the Local
Governments, except as expressly set forth herein.
J.Signing and execution. This MOA may be executed in counterparts, each of whichconstitutes an original, and all of which constitute one and the same agreement. This MOA
may be executed by facsimile or electronic copy in any image format. Each Party
represents that all procedures necessary to authorize such Party’s execution of this MOAhave been performed and that the person signing for such Party has been authorized toexecute the MOA in an official capacity that binds the Party.
14
This Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement is signed
this ___day of ____________, ______ by:
____________________________________________
Name and Title: _______________________________
On behalf of: _________________________________
1
EXHIBIT A
List of Opioid Remediation Uses
Settlement fund recipients shall choose from among abatement strategies, including but not limited to those listed in this Exhibit. The programs and strategies listed in this Exhibit are not exclusive, and fund recipients shall have flexibility to modify their abatement approach as needed and as new uses are discovered.
PART ONE: TREATMENT
A.TREAT OPIOID USE DISORDER (OUD)
Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (“OUD”) and any co-occurring Substance UseDisorder or Mental Health (“SUD/MH”) conditions through evidence-based or evidence-
informed programs5 or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:6
1.Expand availability of treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MHconditions, including all forms of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder(“MOUD”)7 approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
2.Support and reimburse evidence-based services that adhere to the American
Society of Addiction Medicine (“ASAM”) continuum of care for OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
3.Expand telehealth to increase access to treatment for OUD and any co-occurringSUD/MH conditions, including MOUD, as well as counseling, psychiatricsupport, and other treatment and recovery support services.
4.Improve oversight of Opioid Treatment Programs (“OTPs”) to assure evidence-
based or evidence-informed practices such as adequate methadone dosing and lowthreshold approaches to treatment.
5 Use of the terms “evidence-based,” “evidence-informed,” or “best practices” shall not limit the ability of recipients to fund innovative services or those built on culturally specific needs. Rather, recipients are encouraged to support culturally appropriate services and programs for persons with
OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions. 6 As used in this Exhibit, words like “expand,” “fund,” “provide” or the like shall not indicate a preference for new or existing programs. 7 Historically, pharmacological treatment for opioid use disorder was referred to as “Medication-Assisted Treatment” (“MAT”). It has recently been determined that the better term is “Medication
for Opioid Use Disorder” (“MOUD”). This Exhibit will use “MOUD” going forward. Use of the
term MOUD is not intended to and shall in no way limit abatement programs or strategies now or into the future as new strategies and terminology evolve.
2
5.Support mobile intervention, treatment, and recovery services, offered byqualified professionals and service providers, such as peer recovery coaches, for
persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions and for persons
who have experienced an opioid overdose.
6.Provide treatment of trauma for individuals with OUD (e.g., violence, sexualassault, human trafficking, or adverse childhood experiences) and familymembers (e.g., surviving family members after an overdose or overdose fatality),
and training of health care personnel to identify and address such trauma.
7.Support detoxification (detox) and withdrawal management services for peoplewith OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including but not limited tomedical detox, referral to treatment, or connections to other services or supports.
8.Provide training on MOUD for health care providers, first responders, students, or
other supporting professionals, such as peer recovery coaches or recovery
outreach specialists, including telementoring to assist community-based providersin rural or underserved areas.
9.Support workforce development for addiction professionals who work withpersons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH or mental health conditions.
10.Offer fellowships for addiction medicine specialists for direct patient care,
instructors, and clinical research for treatments.
11.Offer scholarships and supports for certified addiction counselors, licensedalcohol and drug counselors, licensed clinical social workers, licensed mentalhealth counselors, and other mental and behavioral health practitioners or
workers, including peer recovery coaches, peer recovery supports, and treatment
coordinators, involved in addressing OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH ormental health conditions, including, but not limited to, training, scholarships,fellowships, loan repayment programs, continuing education, licensing fees, orother incentives for providers to work in rural or underserved areas.
12.Provide funding and training for clinicians to obtain a waiver under the federal
Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (“DATA 2000”) to prescribe MOUD forOUD, and provide technical assistance and professional support to clinicians whohave obtained a DATA 2000 waiver.
13.Dissemination of web-based training curricula, such as the American Academy of
Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service–Opioids web-based
training curriculum and motivational interviewing.
14.Develop and disseminate new curricula, such as the American Academy ofAddiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service for Medication–Assisted Treatment.
3
B. SUPPORT PEOPLE IN TREATMENT AND RECOVERY
Support people in recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions
through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include,
but are not limited to, the programs or strategies that:
1. Provide comprehensive wrap-around services to individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including housing, transportation, education, job placement, job training, or childcare.
2. Provide the full continuum of care of treatment and recovery services for OUD
and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including supportive housing, peer support services and counseling, community navigators, case management, and connections to community-based services.
3. Provide counseling, peer-support, recovery case management and residential
treatment with access to medications for those who need it to persons with OUD
and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
4. Provide access to housing for people with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including supportive housing, recovery housing, housing assistance programs, training for housing providers, or recovery housing programs that allow
or integrate FDA-approved medication with other support services.
5. Provide community support services, including social and legal services, to assist in deinstitutionalizing persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
6. Support or expand peer-recovery centers, which may include support groups,
social events, computer access, or other services for persons with OUD and any
co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
7. Provide or support transportation to treatment or recovery programs or services for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
8. Provide employment training or educational services for persons in treatment for
or recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
9. Identify successful recovery programs such as physician, pilot, and college recovery programs, and provide support and technical assistance to increase the number and capacity of high-quality programs to help those in recovery.
10. Engage non-profits, faith-based communities, and community coalitions to
support people in treatment and recovery and to support family members in their
efforts to support the person with OUD in the family.
4
11.Provide training and development of procedures for government staff toappropriately interact and provide social and other services to individuals with or
in recovery from OUD, including reducing stigma.
12.Support stigma reduction efforts regarding treatment and support for persons withOUD, including reducing the stigma on effective treatment.
13.Create or support culturally appropriate services and programs for persons withOUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including but not limited to new
Americans, African Americans, and American Indians.
14.Create and/or support recovery high schools.
15.Hire or train behavioral health workers to provide or expand any of the services orsupports listed above.
C.CONNECT PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP TO THE HELP THEY NEED
(CONNECTIONS TO CARE)
Provide connections to care for people who have—or are at risk of developing—OUDand any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions through evidence-based or evidence-informedprograms or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:
1.Ensure that health care providers are screening for OUD and other risk factors and
know how to appropriately counsel and treat (or refer if necessary) a patient for
OUD treatment.
2.Fund Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment (“SBIRT”)programs to reduce the transition from use to disorders, including SBIRT servicesto pregnant women who are uninsured or not eligible for Medicaid.
3.Provide training and long-term implementation of SBIRT in key systems (health,
schools, colleges, criminal justice, and probation), with a focus on youth andyoung adults when transition from misuse to opioid disorder is common.
4.Purchase automated versions of SBIRT and support ongoing costs of thetechnology.
5.Expand services such as navigators and on-call teams to begin MOUD in hospital
emergency departments.
6.Provide training for emergency room personnel treating opioid overdose patientson post-discharge planning, including community referrals for MOUD, recoverycase management or support services.
7.Support hospital programs that transition persons with OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, or persons who have experienced an opioid overdose, intoclinically appropriate follow-up care through a bridge clinic or similar approach.
5
8.Support crisis stabilization centers that serve as an alternative to hospitalemergency departments for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions or persons that have experienced an opioid overdose.
9.Support the work of Emergency Medical Systems, including peer supportspecialists, to connect individuals to treatment or other appropriate servicesfollowing an opioid overdose or other opioid-related adverse event.
10.Provide funding for peer support specialists or recovery coaches in emergency
departments, detox facilities, recovery centers, recovery housing, or similar
settings; offer services, supports, or connections to care to persons with OUD andany co-occurring SUD/MH conditions or to persons who have experienced anopioid overdose.
11.Expand warm hand-off services to transition to recovery services.
12.Create or support school-based contacts that parents can engage with to seek
immediate treatment services for their child; and support prevention, intervention,treatment, and recovery programs focused on young people.
13.Develop and support best practices on addressing OUD in the workplace.
14.Support assistance programs for health care providers with OUD.
15.Engage non-profits and the faith community as a system to support outreach for
treatment.
16.Support centralized call centers that provide information and connections toappropriate services and supports for persons with OUD and any co-occurringSUD/MH conditions.
D.ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE-INVOLVED PERSONS
Address the needs of persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions whoare involved in, are at risk of becoming involved in, or are transitioning out of thecriminal justice system through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs orstrategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:
1.Support pre-arrest or pre-arraignment diversion and deflection strategies for
persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, includingestablished strategies such as:
1.Self-referral strategies such as the Angel Programs or the Police AssistedAddiction Recovery Initiative (“PAARI”);
2.Active outreach strategies such as the Drug Abuse Response Team
(“DART”) model;
6
3. “Naloxone Plus” strategies, which work to ensure that individuals who have received naloxone to reverse the effects of an overdose are then
linked to treatment programs or other appropriate services;
4. Officer prevention strategies, such as the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (“LEAD”) model;
5. Officer intervention strategies such as the Leon County, Florida Adult Civil Citation Network or the Chicago Westside Narcotics Diversion to
Treatment Initiative; or
6. Co-responder and/or alternative responder models to address OUD-related 911 calls with greater SUD expertise.
2. Support pre-trial services that connect individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions to evidence-informed treatment, including
MOUD, and related services.
3. Support treatment and recovery courts that provide evidence-based options for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
4. Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MOUD, recovery support, harm reduction, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions who are incarcerated in jail or prison.
5. Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MOUD, recovery support, harm reduction, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions who are leaving jail or prison or have recently left jail or prison, are on probation or parole, are under community corrections
supervision, or are in re-entry programs or facilities.
6. Support critical time interventions (“CTI”), particularly for individuals living with dual-diagnosis OUD/serious mental illness, and services for individuals who face immediate risks and service needs and risks upon release from correctional settings.
7. Provide training on best practices for addressing the needs of criminal justice-
involved persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions to law enforcement, correctional, or judicial personnel or to providers of treatment, recovery, harm reduction, case management, or other services offered in connection with any of the strategies described in this section.
E. ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF THE PERINATAL POPULATION, CAREGIVERS, AND FAMILIES, INCLUDING BABIES WITH NEONATAL OPIOID WITHDRAWAL SYNDROME.
Address the needs of the perinatal population and caregivers with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, and the needs of their families, including babies with
7
neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (“NOWS”), through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:
1. Support evidence-based or evidence-informed treatment, including MOUD,
recovery services and supports, and prevention services for the perinatal population—or individuals who could become pregnant—who have OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, and other measures to educate and provide support to caregivers and families affected by Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal
Syndrome.
2. Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and recovery services, including MOUD, for uninsured individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions for up to 12 months postpartum.
3. Provide training for obstetricians or other healthcare personnel who work with the
perinatal population and their families regarding treatment of OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
4. Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and recovery support for NOWS babies; expand services for better continuum of care with infant-caregiver dyad; and expand long-term treatment and services for medical monitoring of
NOWS babies and their caregivers and families.
5. Provide training to health care providers who work with the perinatal population and caregivers on best practices for compliance with federal requirements that children born with NOWS get referred to appropriate services and receive a plan of safe care.
6. Provide child and family supports for caregivers with OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, emphasizing the desire to keep families together.
7. Provide enhanced support for children and family members suffering trauma as a result of addiction in the family; and offer trauma-informed behavioral health treatment for adverse childhood events.
8. Offer home-based wrap-around services to persons with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions, including, but not limited to, parent skills training.
9. Provide support for Children’s Services—Fund additional positions and services, including supportive housing and other residential services, relating to children
being removed from the home and/or placed in foster care due to custodial opioid
use.
8
PART TWO: PREVENTION
F. PREVENT OVER-PRESCRIBING AND ENSURE APPROPRIATE
PRESCRIBING AND DISPENSING OF OPIOIDS
Support efforts to prevent over-prescribing and ensure appropriate prescribing and dispensing of opioids through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Funding medical provider education and outreach regarding best prescribing
practices for opioids consistent with the Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for
Chronic Pain from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, including providers at hospitals (academic detailing).
2. Training for health care providers regarding safe and responsible opioid prescribing, dosing, and tapering patients off opioids.
3. Continuing Medical Education (CME) on appropriate prescribing of opioids.
4. Providing Support for non-opioid pain treatment alternatives, including training providers to offer or refer to multi-modal, evidence-informed treatment of pain.
5. Supporting enhancements or improvements to Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (“PDMPs”), including, but not limited to, improvements that:
1. Increase the number of prescribers using PDMPs;
2. Improve point-of-care decision-making by increasing the quantity, quality, or format of data available to prescribers using PDMPs, by improving the interface that prescribers use to access PDMP data, or both; or
3. Enable states to use PDMP data in support of surveillance or intervention
strategies, including MOUD referrals and follow-up for individuals
identified within PDMP data as likely to experience OUD in a manner that complies with all relevant privacy and security laws and rules.
6. Ensuring PDMPs incorporate available overdose/naloxone deployment data, including the United States Department of Transportation’s Emergency Medical
Technician overdose database in a manner that complies with all relevant privacy
and security laws and rules.
7. Increasing electronic prescribing to prevent diversion or forgery.
8. Educating dispensers on appropriate opioid dispensing.
9
G.PREVENT MISUSE OF OPIOIDS
Support efforts to discourage or prevent misuse of opioids through evidence-based or
evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the
following:
1.Funding media campaigns to prevent opioid misuse, including but not limited tofocusing on risk factors and early interventions.
2.Corrective advertising or affirmative public education campaigns based on
evidence.
3.Public education relating to drug disposal.
4.Drug take-back disposal or destruction programs.
5.Funding community anti-drug coalitions that engage in drug prevention efforts.
6.Supporting community coalitions in implementing evidence-informed prevention,
such as reduced social access and physical access, stigma reduction—including
staffing, educational campaigns, support for people in treatment or recovery, ortraining of coalitions in evidence-informed implementation, including theStrategic Prevention Framework developed by the U.S. Substance Abuse andMental Health Services Administration (“SAMHSA”).
7.Engaging non-profits and faith-based communities as systems to support
prevention.
8.Funding evidence-based prevention programs in schools or evidence-informedschool and community education programs and campaigns for students, families,school employees, school athletic programs, parent-teacher and student
associations, and others.
9.School-based or youth-focused programs or strategies that have demonstratedeffectiveness in preventing drug misuse and seem likely to be effective inpreventing the uptake and use of opioids.
10.Create or support community-based education or intervention services for
families, youth, and adolescents at risk for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions.
11.Support evidence-informed programs or curricula to address mental health needsof young people who may be at risk of misusing opioids or other drugs, includingemotional modulation and resilience skills.
12.Support greater access to mental health services and supports for young people,
including services and supports provided by school nurses, behavioral health
10
workers or other school staff, to address mental health needs in young people that (when not properly addressed) increase the risk of opioid or another drug misuse.
H.PREVENT OVERDOSE DEATHS AND OTHER HARMS (HARM REDUCTION)
Support efforts to prevent or reduce overdose deaths or other opioid-related harmsthrough evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or strategies that may include,but are not limited to, the following:
1.Increased availability and distribution of naloxone and other drugs that treat
overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, individuals with OUD and their
friends and family members, schools, community navigators and outreachworkers, persons being released from jail or prison, or other members of thegeneral public.
2.Public health entities providing free naloxone to anyone in the community.
3.Training and education regarding naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses
for first responders, overdose patients, patients taking opioids, families, schools,community support groups, and other members of the general public.
4.Enabling school nurses and other school staff to respond to opioid overdoses, andprovide them with naloxone, training, and support.
5.Expanding, improving, or developing data tracking software and applications for
overdoses/naloxone revivals.
6.Public education relating to emergency responses to overdoses.
7.Public education relating to immunity and Good Samaritan laws.
8.Educating first responders regarding the existence and operation of immunity and
Good Samaritan laws.
9.Syringe service programs and other evidence-informed programs to reduce harmsassociated with intravenous drug use, including supplies, staffing, space, peersupport services, referrals to treatment, fentanyl checking, connections to care,and the full range of harm reduction and treatment services provided by these
programs.
10.Expanding access to testing and treatment for infectious diseases such as HIV andHepatitis C resulting from intravenous opioid use.
11.Supporting mobile units that offer or provide referrals to harm reduction services,treatment, recovery supports, health care, or other appropriate services to persons
that use opioids or persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
11
12.Providing training in harm reduction strategies to health care providers, students,peer recovery coaches, recovery outreach specialists, or other professionals that
provide care to persons who use opioids or persons with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
13.Supporting screening for fentanyl in routine clinical toxicology testing.
PART THREE: OTHER STRATEGIES
I.FIRST RESPONDERS
In addition to items in section C, D and H relating to first responders, support thefollowing:
1.Law enforcement expenditures related to the opioid epidemic.
2.Education of law enforcement or other first responders regarding appropriate
practices and precautions when dealing with fentanyl or other drugs.
3.Provision of wellness and support services for first responders and others whoexperience secondary trauma associated with opioid-related emergency events.
J.LEADERSHIP, PLANNING AND COORDINATION
Support efforts to provide leadership, planning, coordination, facilitations, training and
technical assistance to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or
strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:
1.Statewide, regional, local or community regional planning to identify root causesof addiction and overdose, goals for reducing harms related to the opioidepidemic, and areas and populations with the greatest needs for treatment
intervention services, and to support training and technical assistance and other
strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategylist.
2.A dashboard to (a) share reports, recommendations, or plans to spend opioidsettlement funds; (b) to show how opioid settlement funds have been spent; (c) to
report program or strategy outcomes; or (d) to track, share or visualize key opioid-
or health-related indicators and supports as identified through collaborativestatewide, regional, local or community processes.
3.Invest in infrastructure or staffing at government or not-for-profit agencies tosupport collaborative, cross-system coordination with the purpose of preventing
overprescribing, opioid misuse, or opioid overdoses, treating those with OUD and
any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, supporting them in treatment or recovery,connecting them to care, or implementing other strategies to abate the opioidepidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list.
12
4. Provide resources to staff government oversight and management of opioid abatement programs.
5. Support multidisciplinary collaborative approaches consisting of, but not limited
to, public health, public safety, behavioral health, harm reduction, and others at the state, regional, local, nonprofit, and community level to maximize collective impact.
K. TRAINING
In addition to the training referred to throughout this document, support training to abate
the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:
1. Provide funding for staff training or networking programs and services to improve the capability of government, community, and not-for-profit entities to abate the
opioid crisis.
2. Support infrastructure and staffing for collaborative cross-system coordination to prevent opioid misuse, prevent overdoses, and treat those with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, or implement other strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list (e.g., health care,
primary care, pharmacies, PDMPs, etc.).
L. RESEARCH
Support opioid abatement research that may include, but is not limited to, the following:
1. Monitoring, surveillance, data collection and evaluation of programs and strategies described in this opioid abatement strategy list.
2. Research non-opioid treatment of chronic pain.
3. Research on improved service delivery for modalities such as SBIRT that demonstrate promising but mixed results in populations vulnerable to opioid use disorders.
4. Research on novel harm reduction and prevention efforts such as the
provision of fentanyl test strips.
5. Research on innovative supply-side enforcement efforts such as improved detection of mail-based delivery of synthetic opioids.
6. Expanded research on swift/certain/fair models to reduce and deter opioid misuse within criminal justice populations that build upon promising
approaches used to address other substances (e.g., Hawaii HOPE and
Dakota 24/7).
13
7. Epidemiological surveillance of OUD-related behaviors in critical populations, including individuals entering the criminal justice system,
including, but not limited to approaches modeled on the Arrestee Drug
Abuse Monitoring (“ADAM”) system.
8. Qualitative and quantitative research regarding public health risks and harm reduction opportunities within illicit drug markets, including surveys of market participants who sell or distribute illicit opioids.
9. Geospatial analysis of access barriers to MOUD and their association with
treatment engagement and treatment outcomes.
M. POST-MORTEM
1. Toxicology tests for the range of opioids, including synthetic opioids, seen in overdose deaths as well as newly evolving synthetic opioids infiltrating the drug
supply.
2. Toxicology method development and method validation for the range of synthetic opioids observed now and in the future, including the cost of installation, maintenance, repairs and training of capital equipment.
3. Autopsies in cases of overdose deaths resulting from opioids and synthetic
opioids.
4. Additional storage space/facilities for bodies directly related to opioid or synthetic opioid related deaths.
5. Comprehensive death investigations for individuals where a death is caused by or suspected to have been caused by an opioid or synthetic opioid overdose, whether
intentional or accidental (overdose fatality reviews).
6. Indigent burial for unclaimed remains resulting from overdose deaths.
7. Navigation-to-care services for individuals with opioid use disorder who are encountered by the medical examiner’s office as either family and/or social network members of decedents dying of opioid overdose.
8. Epidemiologic data management and reporting to public health and public safety
stakeholders regarding opioid overdose fatalities.
1
EXHIBIT B
Local Abatement Funds Allocation
Subdivision Allocation Percentage
AITKIN COUNTY 0.5760578506020%
Andover city 0.1364919450741%
ANOKA COUNTY 5.0386504680954%
Apple Valley city 0.2990817344560%
BECKER COUNTY 0.6619330684437%
BELTRAMI COUNTY 0.7640787092763%
BENTON COUNTY 0.6440948102319%
BIG STONE COUNTY 0.1194868774775%
Blaine city 0.4249516912759%
Bloomington city 0.4900195550092%
BLUE EARTH COUNTY 0.6635420704652%
Brooklyn Center city 0.1413853902225%
Brooklyn Park city 0.2804136234778%
BROWN COUNTY 0.3325325415732%
Burnsville city 0.5135361296508%
CARLTON COUNTY 0.9839591749060%
CARVER COUNTY 1.1452829659572%
CASS COUNTY 0.8895681513437%
CHIPPEWA COUNTY 0.2092611794436%
CHISAGO COUNTY 0.9950193750117%
CLAY COUNTY 0.9428475281726%
CLEARWATER COUNTY 0.1858592042741%
COOK COUNTY 0.1074594959729%
Coon Rapids city 0.5772642444915%
Cottage Grove city 0.2810994719143%
COTTONWOOD COUNTY 0.1739065270025%
CROW WING COUNTY 1.1394859174804%
DAKOTA COUNTY 4.4207140602835%
DODGE COUNTY 0.2213963257778%
DOUGLAS COUNTY 0.6021779472345%
Duluth city 1.1502115379896%
Eagan city 0.3657951576014%
Eden Prairie city 0.2552171572659%
Edina city 0.1973054822135%
FARIBAULT COUNTY 0.2169409335358%
FILLMORE COUNTY 0.2329591105316%
FREEBORN COUNTY 0.3507169823793%
GOODHUE COUNTY 0.5616542387089%
2
Subdivision Allocation Percentage
GRANT COUNTY 0.0764556498477%
HENNEPIN COUNTY 19.0624622261821%
HOUSTON COUNTY 0.3099019273452%
HUBBARD COUNTY 0.4582368775192%
Inver Grove Heights city 0.2193400520297%
ISANTI COUNTY 0.7712992707537%
ITASCA COUNTY 1.1406408131328%
JACKSON COUNTY 0.1408950443531%
KANABEC COUNTY 0.3078966749987%
KANDIYOHI COUNTY 0.1581167542252%
KITTSON COUNTY 0.0812834506382%
KOOCHICHING COUNTY 0.2612581865885%
LAC QUI PARLE COUNTY 0.0985665133485%
LAKE COUNTY 0.1827750320696%
LAKE OF THE WOODS COUNTY 0.1123105027592%
Lakeville city 0.2822249627090%
LE SUEUR COUNTY 0.3225703347466%
LINCOLN COUNTY 0.1091919983965%
LYON COUNTY 0.2935118186364%
MAHNOMEN COUNTY 0.1416417687922%
Mankato city 0.3698584320930%
Maple Grove city 0.1814019046900%
Maplewood city 0.1875101678223%
MARSHALL COUNTY 0.1296352091057%
MARTIN COUNTY 0.2543064014046%
MCLEOD COUNTY 0.1247104517575%
MEEKER COUNTY 0.3744031515243%
MILLE LACS COUNTY 0.9301506695846%
Minneapolis city 4.8777618689374%
Minnetonka city 0.1967231070869%
Moorhead city 0.4337377037965%
MORRISON COUNTY 0.7178981419196%
MOWER COUNTY 0.5801769148506%
MURRAY COUNTY 0.1348775389165%
NICOLLET COUNTY 0.1572381052896%
NOBLES COUNTY 0.1562005111775%
NORMAN COUNTY 0.1087596675165%
North St. Paul city 0.0575844069340%
OLMSTED COUNTY 1.9236715094724%
OTTER TAIL COUNTY 0.8336175418789%
PENNINGTON COUNTY 0.3082576394945%
PINE COUNTY 0.5671222706703%
3
Subdivision Allocation Percentage
PIPESTONE COUNTY 0.1535154503112%
Plymouth city 0.1762541472591%
POLK COUNTY 0.8654291473909%
POPE COUNTY 0.1870129873102%
Proctor city 0.0214374127881%
RAMSEY COUNTY 7.1081424150498%
RED LAKE COUNTY 0.0532649128178%
REDWOOD COUNTY 0.2809842366614%
RENVILLE COUNTY 0.2706888807449%
RICE COUNTY 0.2674764397830%
Richfield city 0.2534018444052%
Rochester city 0.7363082848763%
ROCK COUNTY 0.2043437335735%
ROSEAU COUNTY 0.2517872793025%
Roseville city 0.1721905548771%
Savage city 0.1883576635033%
SCOTT COUNTY 1.3274301645797%
Shakopee city 0.2879873611373%
SHERBURNE COUNTY 1.2543449471994%
SIBLEY COUNTY 0.2393480708456%
ST LOUIS COUNTY 4.7407767169807%
St. Cloud city 0.7330089009029%
St. Louis Park city 0.1476314588229%
St. Paul city 3.7475206797569%
STEARNS COUNTY 2.4158085321227%
STEELE COUNTY 0.3969975262520%
STEVENS COUNTY 0.1439474275223%
SWIFT COUNTY 0.1344167568499%
TODD COUNTY 0.4180909816781%
TRAVERSE COUNTY 0.0903964133868%
WABASHA COUNTY 0.3103038996965%
WADENA COUNTY 0.2644094336575%
WASECA COUNTY 0.2857912156338%
WASHINGTON COUNTY 3.0852862512586%
WATONWAN COUNTY 0.1475626355615%
WILKIN COUNTY 0.0937962507119%
WINONA COUNTY 0.7755267356126%
Woodbury city 0.4677270171716%
WRIGHT COUNTY 1.6985269385427%
YELLOW MEDICINE COUNTY 0.1742264836427%