In a significant policy shift, Pennsylvania’s board overseeing opioid settlement funds has approved Bucks County’s request to allocate a portion of its funds to support a public defender position. This decision marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over how to address the opioid crisis and could serve as a model for other counties across the state.
The board’s approval comes as a relief to various advocacy groups, including recovery organizations and public defender advocates, who have long stressed the need for equitable funding in the face of the opioid epidemic. Public defender offices, which are often underfunded compared to law enforcement agencies, face mounting pressures to serve clients struggling with addiction. “Public defender offices are chronically underfunded compared to law enforcement agencies,” stated Niels Eriksen Jr., chief public defender in Bucks County. “We are barely keeping our head above water.”
Funding Allocation and Its Implications
Nearly two years ago, Spotlight PA reported on the disparities in how Pennsylvania officials were utilizing opioid settlement funds. A number of district attorneys’ offices, which successfully litigated against drug companies, are slated to receive millions from the settlements. However, the Pennsylvania Opioid Misuse and Addiction Abatement Trust had previously discouraged spending on public defenders. This latest decision may change that narrative.
Advocates argue that funding public defenders is essential for addressing the needs of those affected by addiction. “There is so much of a need across Pennsylvania for more public defenders,” said Sara Jacobson, executive director of the Public Defender Association of Pennsylvania. “The funding disparity is troubling.” The approval of the Bucks County position, which will specifically focus on clients with opioid use and substance use disorders, could encourage other counties to follow suit.
Bucks County plans to allocate approximately $200,000 towards this public defender role, which will assist clients based on self-reported status or verified diagnoses from treatment providers. “The determination is not based on charges brought against a client,” explained James O’Malley, a spokesperson for Bucks County.
Future of Public Defense Funding
As Pennsylvania anticipates receiving around $2 billion from various drug company settlements, the allocation of these funds remains a contentious issue. Payments are expected to last until approximately 2038, and local governments must align their spending with guidelines outlined in a settlement document known as Exhibit E. This document recommends strategies such as overdose reversal drugs and addiction treatment programs but previously did not include funding for public defenders.
The debate over public defender funding came to a head when Elk County sought clarification on whether such spending would be permissible. The advisory committee from the trust responded negatively, asserting that costs for public defenders would not be considered an abatement strategy. This sparked outcry from numerous organizations, including the ACLU of Pennsylvania, which argued that the state was failing to meet its obligation to provide effective legal representation for those unable to afford an attorney.
In December 2023, the board changed its stance, reversing its earlier rejection of Bucks County’s proposal. Tom VanKirk, chair of the trust, expressed support for Bucks County’s initiative, emphasizing the goal of diverting individuals into treatment rather than the criminal justice system. He indicated that the trust is open to considering similar proposals from other counties.
While this development is promising, advocates caution that more funding is necessary to meet the overwhelming demand for public defense services. “While these additional funding sources are very welcome, they will not be nearly enough to close the gap in terms of the actual need here,” stated Ari Shapell, an attorney with the ACLU of Pennsylvania.
Officials within the Public Defender Association remain hopeful that other counties will follow Bucks County’s lead. They plan to provide training to assist public defender offices in applying for settlement funds. “We’re very optimistic,” said Andrew Capone, an assistant director of training with the association.
Despite the recent approval, some counties, such as Elk County, have been cautious in their approach to funding public defenders with settlement money. Commissioner Matthew Quesenberry acknowledged the need for further discussion on the matter, especially considering the finite nature of settlement funds. “Eventually the music’s gonna stop and somebody’s not gonna have a chair,” he remarked, highlighting the importance of sustainable funding for public defense.
The evolving landscape of opioid settlement funds in Pennsylvania presents both challenges and opportunities for addressing the needs of individuals impacted by the crisis. As discussions continue, the focus remains on ensuring that public defenders receive adequate support to fulfill their critical role in the justice system.
