Opioid Board — Hickman County (Unofficial)

Opioid Board · Meeting · Oct 27, 2026 The Opioid Board spent most of its discussion on a proposed United Way-facilitated prevention coalition position, with supporters saying United Way would serve only as fiscal agent for a part-time coalition director and skeptics questioning whether it was the best use of limited opioid funds. No decision was made on that request or any others, and the board said it would review all applications together after the November 30 deadline, likely in December. The board reported $123,026.23 available and $110,250 in pending requests, including $55,000 from United Way, $50,000 from Metropolis Wellness, and $5,000 from CASA. Members were skeptical of Metropolis Wellness because of its software/app-based model and uncertain local presence, while saying CASA’s request appeared worthwhile but wanting local representation present before acting. The board also reviewed outstanding reimbursement issues, including a little over $2,000 still reportedly owed by Educare, and emphasized stronger reporting and state-compliance oversight for future awards. In other business, members discussed filling one vacant seat and said a school-system representative could potentially serve if conflict-of-interest safeguards recommended by CTAS are put in place.

Opioid Board · Meeting · Sep 15, 2026 · 4:00 PM The board’s main action was on a renewed opioid-fund application tied to the Hickman County prevention coalition and administered by United Way as fiscal agent. Members questioned possible duplication with school-based work, the increase from $30,000 to $55,000, the absence of a hired prevention specialist or active coalition board, and whether stronger reporting and payout controls were needed before any funding moved; a motion to proceed failed after two no votes, and the board then voted by voice vote to table the application and ask for a fuller submission with background from the original request, clearer plans and outcomes, and examples from other counties. Financially, the board accepted a report showing about $419,089.45 on hand, discussed roughly $119,089.45 as available for new commitments after outstanding amounts, and noted Educare still owes $94,017, with a clearer repayment timeline expected later. Members also flagged a questionable in-kind room-use entry and said staff should check how a 4-hour booking was calculated. In other business, the board said the United Way/prevention coalition contract remains outstanding, the UT SMART contract is still unfinished, and one board seat is vacant with no appointment made. The meeting also touched on possible future reopening of the grant process and an inquiry from Judge William Bill Lane about potential opioid funding for a National Guard armory project involving underinsured care and monthly dental or medical services, but no formal action was taken on those ideas.

Opioid Board · Meeting · Aug 25, 2026 · 4:00 PM The Opioid Board’s main business was a financial update confirming that United Way returned a prior award after the staff position tied to the request became vacant, and that the schools’ behavioral health invoice for $22,974 was expected to be paid that week. After that payment, the fund balance was reported at about $118,587.98, with July and August interest still to be added, and the board approved the financial report without opposition. Members also discussed that United Way’s earlier request had been about $30,000 and said an updated application is expected for the next meeting. The board noted it is still down two members and discussed the expected nominating process for at least one commissioner appointment, but made no appointment at this meeting. Members briefly asked about a newspaper reference to $165,000 for the schools, but took no action on that issue. The next meeting was rescheduled to September 15 at 4:00 p.m. so the pending United Way application could be heard when more members were available.

Opioid Board · Meeting · Jul 14, 2026 · 4:00 PM The Opioid Board approved its financial report, showing a remaining balance of $58,054.85 after allocating $165,000 for school behavioral health, while noting expected reimbursements of about $30,000 from the school and roughly $13,000 to $15,000 from United Way. Members also confirmed that $22,000 had already been disbursed to Prevention Now and that the school behavioral-health funding had moved on to the budget committee and was expected next before the accounting commission. The board discussed an outstanding Educare balance of about $2,000 and indicated it should keep monitoring the matter, though some members questioned whether legal action would be practical over that amount. Its main action was to defer United Way’s new funding application until the next meeting after members raised concerns about outdated 2025 dates, stale contact information, and the fact that the listed project lead was no longer available; the motion passed without opposition. In that discussion, members said they were not opposed to the prevention program itself and suggested United Way submit a fully updated application that could also revisit the requested amount. The board also voted to move its next meeting to August 25 at 4:00 p.m.

Opioid Board · Meeting · Jan 6, 2026 The Opioid Board quickly approved routine items, heard a public complaint questioning a prior $17,000 website and consulting payment, and received a financial report showing a balance of $204,277.83, including discussion of $685.06 returned from VFW. The board also appointed Mr. Deck to fill a vacancy. Members discussed whether they need a navigator or other oversight support before future grant work proceeds, but took no action, and they deferred 2026 grant applications until February because only two applications had been received. The meeting’s longest and most contentious discussion involved Bernard Community Center, where about $27,299.25 in opioid-grant spending was disallowed over whether ADA-accessible bathroom renovations were actually part of the final approved scope and contract. Bernard argued there had been a communication breakdown and pushed for an in-kind solution using facility access rather than repayment, while county legal officials warned the state could still hold the county liable if the expenditure is not properly resolved. By the end of the meeting, the board appeared to keep discussing an in-kind framework instead of ordering immediate repayment, but no clear final vote or resolution was captured.

Content