Arizona is confronting the uncomfortable reality. The opioid crisis in the state has not receded. In fact, recent reports of rising overdose incidents in the Phoenix area suggests the trajectory may actually be again worsening after some limited hard-fought progress had been made. At a moment like this, the choices Arizona’s policymakers make about how to spend $1.14 billion in opioid settlement funds that our state will be receiving over the next several years carry extraordinary weight.
The intent of how these settlements should be used is clear. They were not meant to replace existing spending or support unrelated priorities. Instead, they are supposed to help mitigate the social and economic damages that opioid addiction has caused. This means funding prevention, treatment, recovery services, and enforcement strategies that directly address these impacts. Transparency and accountability measures — such as public reporting dashboards and outcome tracking — are also increasingly recognized as essential to ensure these dollars reach their intended targets and produce measurable impact.
Arizona has already seen how easily those guardrails can blur. In the 2025 state budget, the legislature directed the first $115 million in opioid settlement funding to fund existing operations at the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation and Reentry over legal objections raised by Attorney General Kris Mayes. There were legitimate questions at the time about whether that allocation complied with the terms of the settlement and whether it could affect Arizona’s eligibility for future disbursements. To be fair, correctional settings absolutely need substance-use treatment resources; incarceration and addiction frequently intersect, and treatment behind bars can save lives. But the broader concern remains whether settlement funds were being used as a convenient fiscal patch rather than a targeted addiction-response investment.
That episode should not define Arizona’s entire approach going forward, but it does underscore the stakes. With overdose concerns intensifying again Arizona must ensure future settlement dollars are directed toward expanding treatment access, strengthening prevention efforts, and addressing the evolving threat posed by fentanyl and an even more powerful class of synthetic opioids that is now emerging.
This is not merely a budgeting question; it is a public-health imperative. Treatment capacity still lags demand in many communities. Rural areas in particular face shortages of medication-assisted treatment providers, detox facilities, and recovery support infrastructure. First responders continue to report increasing encounters with fentanyl-laced substances, which dramatically increases the risk of overdose, even among users that has no intention of taking an opioid. Families seeking help often encounter waiting lists or fragmented services. Settlement funds present a rare opportunity to close those gaps.
There is also a strong fiscal argument for a disciplined use of these resources. While it may be tempting to use these funds to balance the budget, investing settlement dollars wisely today can ease taxpayer burdens tomorrow. Effective addiction treatment reduces emergency room visits, criminal justice costs, lost workforce participation, and long-term public assistance expenditures. Conversely, diverting funds to unrelated projects risks perpetuating the very social costs the settlements were meant to alleviate.
Arizona policymakers should therefore focus on several practical priorities. First, ensure settlement funds demonstrably expand addiction treatment and prevention capacity rather than replacing existing spending. Second, maintain transparent public reporting so citizens can track where every dollar goes and what outcomes result. Third, prioritize community-level interventions — including naloxone distribution, crisis-response partnerships, and recovery-support programs — that have shown measurable success in other states.
None of this should be subject to partisan finger-pointing. Addiction does not respect party lines, and neither should our response. But fiscal responsibility, public health stewardship, and compassion for those struggling with substance use disorder are values that can and should converge here.
Arizona has a genuine opportunity to make progress against opioid addiction. The settlement funds now arriving represent both accountability for past harms and hope for future solutions. As overdose concerns resurface, the worst outcome would be complacency or misallocation.
We cannot undo the damage opioids have already inflicted, but we can decide how seriously we take the responsibility to respond. Arizona must ensure every settlement dollar moves us closer to treatment, recovery, and prevention — not further away.
Lori Klein is a former Arizona State Senator who previously was a member on the Committee on Appropriations and chaired the Subcommittee on Healthcare.
Be the first to comment