CC SR 20211207 07 - National Opioid Settlement
01203.0003/752142.1
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 12/07/2021
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to join in the national opioid litigation settlement
agreements.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Adopt a Resolution No. ___, entitled A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO ENTER INTO THE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS WITH MCKESSON CORPORATION, CARDINAL
HEALTH, INC., AMERISOURCEBERGEN CORPORATION, JOHNSON &
JOHNSON, JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., ORTHO-MCNEIL-JANSSEN
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., AND JANSSEN PHARMACEUITCA, INC., TO
AGREE TO TERMS OF THE STATE-SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS
ALLOCATING SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS, AND TO AUTHORIZE ENTRY INTO
THE STATE-SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL;
(2) Approve the Settlement Participation Form for the City’s participation in the
National Opioid Settlement with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., and
AmerisourceBergen Corporation;
(3) Approve the California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and
Use of Settlement Funds - Distributor Settlement;
(4) Approve the Settlement Participation Form for the City’s participation in the
National Opioid Settlement with Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica,
Inc.;
(5) Approve the California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and
Use of Settlement Funds - Janssen Settlement;
(6) Authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to execute the documents identified
in Recommendation Nos. 2 through 5; and
(7) Authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to assign or designate that the City’s
portion of the Settlement proceeds be paid to the County of Los Angeles to be
utilized by the County for the authorized purposes; and
(8) Authorize the City Manager and City Attorney to carry out all necessary acts such
that the City can participate in the National Opioid Settlements, including, but not
limited to, the transmittal of the executed documents in Recommendation Nos. 2
through 5 (as necessary and applicable).
FISCAL IMPACT: There will be no expenditure on the part of the City to participate in
these settlements (other than the time spent by staff and the City Attorney in reviewing
documents and preparing this staff report). The amount of the settlement fund to be
1
CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
01203.0003/752142.1
distributed to the City is undetermined at this time and depends on the number of states,
counties, and cities that elect to join in the settlements. Because of the strict requirements
imposed on the use of settlement funds and City Staff limitations, it is recommended that
settlement funds finally determined to be allocated to the City be assigned or transferred
to the County of Los Angeles who have both the staff and expertise to best administer the
settlement agreement.
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: William W. Wynder, City Attorney
REVIEWED BY: Same as above
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Resolution No. 2021- ____ (page A-1)
B. Settlement Participation Form for the City’s participation in the National Opioid
Settlement with McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., and
AmerisourceBergen Corporation (the “Distributor Settlement”) (page B-1)
C. California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of
Settlement Funds - Distributor Settlement (page C-1)
D. Settlement Participation Form for the City’s participation in the National Opioid
Settlement with Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ortho-
McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc, (the
“Janssen Settlement) (page D-1)
E. California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of
Settlement Funds - Janssen Settlement (page E-1)
F. Scope of the Release (page F-1)
G. Opioid Abatement Uses (page G-1)
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
Various states, counties, and cities have been in litigation with the McKesson Corporation,
Cardinal Health, Inc., and AmerisourceBergen Corporation. (collectively, the
“Distributors”) and Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ortho -McNeil-
Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc. (collectively, the
“Manufacturer”) (for purposes of this report, the Distributors and Manufa cturer are
collectively referred to as the “Settling Defendants”).
The litigation concerns the distribution and manufacture of opioids that have contributed
to the opioid addiction epidemic in the United States. Two tentative settlements have been
reached with the Distributors and Manufacturer, respectively (“National Opioids
Settlements”).
2
01203.0003/752142.1
In order to proceed, a “critical mass” of participation by states, counties, and cities must
be achieved. This critical mass is determined by the Settling Defendants in their sole
discretion. If a critical mass is not achieved, then the National Opioids Settlements do not
proceed and the litigation continues. At this stage, a critical mass of states has already
occurred.
Assuming there is a critical mass to proceed, the payout amounts under the settlements
with the Settling Defendants is contingent upon various factors, including the number of
states, counties, and cities participating, with a maximum payout of $21 billion over the
course of 18 years by the Distributors and $5 billion over no more than nine years by the
Manufacturer to all participating entities.
A portion of that amount will be received by California, its counties, and cities. The actual
amount for the City is dependent on a number of variables, incl uding, but not limited to,
the number of California cities and counties participating, whether or not cities later sue
the Settling Defendants, and certain actions that may be taken by the State of California.
Further, the City’s share of the settlement amount is determined using three factors: (1)
Opioid use disorder; (2) Opioid deaths; and (3) Opioid dosage.
The National Settlements allot money to California to be allocated between the state and
local governments. The unofficial projected estimate of the California share is
$2,263,923,602. That amount is divided between state, cities, and counties by agreement
(the “Allocation Agreements”). The Allocation Agreements split the dollars coming into
California as follows: 15% to a State Fund; 70% to local governments in an Abatement
Accounts Fund; and 15% to litigating local governments in a Subdivision Fund.
If the City Council elects to participate in the settlements, the funds will automatically be
allocated to the County unless the City opts to receive the funds directly; however, there
are certain reporting and tracking requirements if the City receives the funds directly
(discussed below).
By participating in the National Opioid Settlements, the City would be agreeing to a very
broad release of opioid-related claims in the lawsuit against the Settling Defendants,
which includes both known and unknown claims (see Attachment F). However, not
participating and litigating on its own means that the City is required to comply with very
strict deadlines with respect to litigation.1
The National Opioids Settlements funds must be used only for range of approved
“abatement uses,” which includes a range of intervention, treatment, education, and
recovery services. However, the use of funds is restricted to the abatement uses identified
1 The Ohio Federal District Court managing all cases has ordered that any non-settling litigating entities
(or any entity that brings suit later) will be in immediate active litigation with deadlines to do the following in
90 days: 1. Disclose nature and amount of damages 2. Disclose computation of monetary relief sought. 3.
Produce documentation of past expenditures. 4. Produce documentation of intended future expenditures-
what they are and who will spend- how they will address harms. 5. Identify and quantify all Defendant
Suspicious Order and disclose methodology. 6. Produce all of your documents. 7. Disclose experts. 8.
Disclose updated fact sheets. Essentially the Court will make all those not signing on do the work of their
entire case in 3 months.
3
01203.0003/752142.1
in the settlements (see Attachment G). Cities and counties must be aware that the
Settlement Agreements and the Allocation Agreements require that the money in the
Abatement Accounts Fund must be spent on remediation with no less than 50% of each
local government’s allocation in each calendar year spent on one or more of the following
High Impact Abatement Activities:
1. The provision of matching funds or operating costs for substance use
disorder facilities within the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure
Program;
2. Creating new or expanded Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) treatment
infrastructure;
3. Addressing the needs of communities of color and vulnerable
populations (including sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations)
that are disproportionately impacted by SUD;
4. Diversion of people with SUD from the justice system into treatment,
including by providing training and resources to first and early
responders (sworn and non-sworn) and implementing best practices for
outreach, diversion and deflection, employability, restorative justice, and
harm reduction; and/or
5. Interventions to prevent drug addiction in vulnerable youths.
There are also significant public reporting and tracking requirements on the expenditures
for such funds, which may make county receipt and expenditure of such funds more
desirable. For example, the settlement with the Manufacturer would require the following
reporting and tracking:
1. Preparation of annual written reports regarding the use of the funds. This
report must include a certification that all funds received has been used in
compliance with the Manufacturer settlement agreements. This report must
be in a form that is approved by the California Department of Health Care
Services (“DHCS”).
2. The City would be required to track all deposits and expenditures.
3. Funds not used for a permitted purpose must be identified and included in
the annual report (including any attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, or
litigation costs). This information must also be reported to the Manufacturer
and the settlement fund administrator.
In terms of enforcement, if DHCS believes that the use of settlement funds is inconsistent
with the requirements, it must meet and confer with the City and if not resolved, DHCS
may perform an audit. If the issue is not resolved, DHCS can bring a motion or action in
court to resolve the concern or to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement/state -
allocation agreement.
Settlement funds will be initially deposited into escrow by the end of 2021 and will make
additional deposits in early Summer of 2022. Settlement funds will begin to be distributed
to states and local governments as early as April 2022, depending on when a settling
state meets the requirements in the settlement documents.
4
01203.0003/752142.1
There are also time limits on expenditure where money not expe nded or encumbered
within five years of receipt must be transferred to the state. However, these requirements
only apply to the City if it elects to receive direct distribution and does not apply if the
funds go to the county. The Office of the Los Angeles County Counsel has urged all cities
in the county to join in the settlements.
Without expressly requesting the same, there is a sentiment that the county would prefer
to have the City assign its portion of the settlement funds for county use. As already
noted, because of the strict requirements imposed on the use of settlement funds and
City staff limitations, it is recommended that settlement funds allocable to the City be
assigned or transferred to the County of Los Angeles who have both the staff and
expertise to best administer the settlement agreement.
The National Opioids Settlements also provide for injunctive relief that requires changes
to the Distributors’ and Manufacturer’s conduct. This includes the creation of a
clearinghouse through which the Distributors will be required to account for their own
shipments and the shipments of the other distributors, in order to detect, stop, and report
suspicious opioids orders. In addition, the Manufacturer (which ceased marketing opioids
in 2015 and ceased selling opioids in 2020) will not market or sell any opioid products in
the next 10 years and has agreed to cease lobbying concerning prescription opioids for
ten years.
Council approval and authorization to execute, submit, and actual receipt of all required
settlement documents must be completed before January 2, 2022.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for
the City Council’s consideration:
1. Participate in the national settlement by taking the actions noted above, but opt
to retain and utilize the City’s share of the settlement funds rather than
transferring or assigning the same to the County of Los Angeles.
2. Decline to participate in the national settlement and become an independent
litigant.
3. Decline to participate in the national settlement.
5
01203.0003/752157.1
RESOLUTION NO. 2021- ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO ENTER INTO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS WITH
MCKESSON CORPORATION, CARDINAL HEALTH, INC.,
AMERISOURCEBERGEN CORPORATION, JOHNSON &
JOHNSON, JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
ORTHO-MCNEIL-JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
AND JANSSEN PHARMACEUITCA, INC., TO AGREE TO
TERMS OF THE STATE-SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS
ALLOCATING SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS, AND TO
AUTHORIZE ENTRY INTO THE STATE-SUBDIVISION
AGREEMENTS WITH THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
WHEREAS, the United States is facing an ongoing public health crisis of opioid
abuse, addiction, overdose, and death. The State of California and California local
governments spend billions of dollars each year to address the direct consequences of
this crisis;
WHEREAS, since 2017, state and local governments in California and around the
United States have been pursuing litigation (the “Litigation”) against certain
manufacturers, distributors, and retailers of opioid pharmaceuticals (the “Opioid
Defendants”) in an effort to hold the Opioid Defendants financially responsible for the
impact of the Opioid Epidemic on the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (“the City”);
WHEREAS, negotiations to settle claims against several of the Opioid Defendants,
specifically McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen
Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ortho -McNeil-Janssen
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Janssen Pharmaceuitca, Inc. (the “Settling Defendants”) have
been ongoing for several years;
WHEREAS, negotiations with the Settling Defendants have resulted in proposed
nationwide settlements of state and local government claims to settle the Litigat ion;
WHEREAS, the proposed terms of those proposed nationwide settlements have
been set forth in the Distributors Master Settlement Agreement and the Janssen Master
Settlement Agreement (collectively “Settlement Agreements”) and, in order to participate
in the Settlement Agreements, the City must enter into participation agreements with
respect to each of the Settlement Agreements (“Participation Agreements”);
WHEREAS, copies of the Settlement Agreements as well as summary of the main
terms of the Settlement Agreements, the deadlines for submitting the Participation
Agreements to the Settlement Agreements and the MDL Court’s Order setting deadlines
for any Plaintiff who declines to enter into the Settlement Agreements, have been
A-1
01203.0003/752157.1 2
provided to the City Council with this Resolution;
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreements provide, among other things, for the
payment of a certain sum to settling government entities in California including to the
State of California and Participating Subdivisions upon occurrence of certain events as
defined in the Settlement Agreements (“California Opioid Funds”);
WHEREAS, California local governments as well as the attorneys representing
those local governments have engaged in extensive discussions with the State Attorney
General’s Office (“AGO”) as to how the California Opioid Funds will be allocated, which
has resulted in the “Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding
Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds- Distributor Settlement” and the “Proposed
California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement
Funds- Janssen Settlement” (collectively the “Allocation Agreements,”) which are
agreements between all of the entities identified in the Allocation Agreements;
WHEREAS, copies of the Allocation Agreements have been provided with this
Resolution;
WHEREAS, the Allocation Agreements propose to allocate the California Opioid
Funds 15% to a State Fund; 70% to local governments in an Abatement Accounts Fund;
and 15% to litigating local governments in a Subdivision Fund. For the avoidance of doubt,
all funds allocated to California from the Settlements will be combined pursuant to
Allocation Agreements, and 15% of that total shall be allocated to the State of California
(the “State of California Allocation”), 70% to the California Abatement Accounts Fund (“CA
Abatement Accounts Fund Allocation”), and 15% to the California Subdivision Fund (“CA
Subdivision Fund Allocation”);
WHEREAS, the funds in the CA Abatement Accounts Fund (i.e., the California
Abatement Accounts Fund Allocation) will be allocated based on an allocation model
developed in connection with the proposed negotiating class in the National Prescription
Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804). The percentage from the CA Abatement Accounts
Fund allocated to each eligible local government (any county or city above 10,000 in
population) (“Eligible Local Government”) is set forth in Appendix 1 to each Allocation
Agreement and provided to the Council with this Resolution. The City’s share of the CA
Abatement Accounts Fund is a product of the total in the CA Abatement Accounts Fund
multiplied by the City’s percentage set forth in Appendix 1 (the “Local Allocation”);
WHEREAS, any city that is an Eligible Local Government will be allocated its Local
Allocation share only when it becomes a Participating Subdivision by signing the
Participation Agreements to the Settlements. The Local Allocation share for a city that is
a Participating Subdivision will be paid to the county in which the city is located, rathe r
than to the city, so long as: (a) the county is a Participating Subdivision, and (b) the city
has not advised the Settlement Fund Administrator that it requests direct payment at least
60 days prior to a Payment Date as defined in the Settlement Agreemen ts.
A-2
01203.0003/752157.1 3
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. The City Council hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager
and City Attorney to settle and release the City’s claims against the Settling Defendants
in exchange for the consideration set forth in the Settlement Agreements, Allocation
Agreements and all exhibits thereto, including, without limitation, taking the following
measures:
A. The execution of the Participation Agreement to the Distributors Master
Settlement Agreement and any and all documents ancillary thereto.
B. The execution of the Participation Agreement to the Janssen Master
Settlement Agreement and any and all documents ancillary thereto.
C. The execution of the Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement
Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds- Distributor Settlement
by executing the signature pages thereof.
D. The execution of the Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement
Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds- Janssen Settlement
Allocation Agreements by executing the signature pages thereof.
Section 3. The City Council hereby ratifies, confirms, and approves all actions
heretofore taken by the City Council and other appropriate public officers and agents of
the City with respect to the matters contemplated under this Resolution.
Section 4. This Resolution shall be effective on upon its adoption. The City
Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 7th day of December 2021.
___________________
Mayor
Attest:
____________________
Teresa Takaoka, City Clerk
State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
A-3
01203.0003/752157.1 4
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
I, Teresa Takaoka, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify
that the above Resolution No. 2021-__ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by
the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on December 7, 2021.
______________________
Teresa Takaoka, City Clerk
A-4
1
Settlement Participation Form
Governmental Entity: Rancho Palos Verdes city State: CA
Authorized Signatory: /officialname/
Address 1: /address1/
Address 2: /address2/
City, State, Zip: /cit/ /state/ /zi/
Phone: /Phone/
Email: /email/
The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”), in order to obtain and in
consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to the Settlement
Agreement dated July 21, 2021 (“Distributor Settlement”), and acting through the
undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Distributor Settlement,
release all Released Claims against all Released Entities, and agrees as follows.
1. The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Distributor Settlement,
understands that all terms in this Election and Release have the meanings defined
therein, and agrees that by this Election, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in
the Distributor Settlement and become a Participating Subdivision as provided therein.
2. The Governmental Entity shall, within 14 days of the Reference Date and prior to the
filing of the Consent Judgment, dismiss with prejudice any Released Claims that it has
filed.
3. The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Distributor Settlement
pertaining to Subdivisions as defined therein.
4. By agreeing to the terms of the Distributor Settlement and becoming a Releasor, the
Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable,
monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date.
5. The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the
Distributor Settlement solely for the purposes provided therein.
6. The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court in the Governmental
Entity’s state where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that court’s role
as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the Distributor
Settlement.
7. The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Distributor Settlement as
provided therein.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 69241C0D-811C-4754-A41F-6372259B7892
B-1
I
--
2
8.The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for
all purposes in the Distributor Settlement, including but not limited to all provisions of
Part XI, and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions,
districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in their official
capacity elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency, person, or
other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity identified
in the definition of Releasor, provides for a release to the fullest extent of its authority.
As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and
irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be
brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released
Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for
in the Distributor Settlement are intended by the Parties to be broad and shall be
interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any
liability relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the
power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. The Distributor Settlement shall be
a complete bar to any Released Claim.
9.The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating
Subdivision as set forth in the Distributor Settlement.
10.In connection with the releases provided for in the Distributor Settlement, each
Governmental Entity expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and
all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of
the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is
similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which
reads:
General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that
the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or
her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by him or her,
would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or
released party.
A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it
knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each
Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles,
releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may
exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether
through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and
which, if known, would materially affect the Governmental Entities’ decision to
participate in the Distributor Settlement.
11.Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Distributor Settlement,
to which Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent this Election and Release is
interpreted differently from the Distributor Settlement in any respect, the Distributor
Settlement controls.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 69241C0D-811C-4754-A41F-6372259B7892
B-2
3
I swear under penalty of perjury that I have all necessary power and authorization to execute
this Election and Release on behalf of the Governmental Entity.
Signature:/signer_1/
Name:/name_1/
Title:/title_1/
Date:/date_1/
DocuSign Envelope ID: 69241C0D-811C-4754-A41F-6372259B7892
B-3 • -
Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement
Regarding Distribution and Use of
Settlement Funds – Distributor Settlement
1. Introduction
Pursuant to the Distributor Settlement Agreement, dated as of July 21, 2021, and any revision
thereto (the “Distributor Settlement Agreement”), including Section V and Exhibit O, the State
of California proposes this agreement (the “CA Distributor Allocation Agreement”) to govern
the allocation, distribution, and use of Settlement Fund payments made to California pursuant to
Sections IV and V of the Distributor Settlement Agreement.1 For the avoidance of doubt, this
agreement does not apply to payments made pursuant to Sections IX or X of the Distributor
Settlement Agreement.
Pursuant to Exhibit O, Paragraph 4, of the Distributor Settlement Agreement, acceptance of this
CA Distributor Allocation Agreement is a requirement to be an Initial Participating Subdivision.
2. Definitions
a) CA Participating Subdivision means a Participating Subdivision that is also (a) a
Plaintiff Subdivision and/or (b) a Primary Subdivision with a population equal to or
greater than 10,000. For the avoidance of doubt, eligible CA Participating
Subdivisions are those California subdivisions listed in Exhibit C (excluding
Litigating Special Districts) and/or Exhibit I to the Distributor Settlement Agreement.
b) Janssen Settlement Agreement means the Janssen Settlement Agreement dated July
21, 2021, and any revision thereto.
c) Litigating Special District means a school district, fire protection district, health
authority, health plan, or other special district that has filed a lawsuit against an
Opioid Defendant. Litigating Special Districts include Downey Unified School
District, Elk Grove Unified School District, Kern High School District, Montezuma
Fire Protection District (located in Stockton, California), Santa Barbara San Luis
Obispo Regional Health Authority, Inland Empire Health Plan, Health Plan of San
Joaquin, and LA Care Health Plan.
d) Plaintiff Subdivision means a Subdivision located in California, other than a
Litigating Special District, that filed a lawsuit, on behalf of the Subdivision and/or
through an official of the Subdivision on behalf of the People of the State of
California, against one or more Opioid Defendants prior to October 1, 2020.
1 A parallel but separate agreement (the “CA Janssen Allocation Agreement”) will govern the
allocation, distribution, and use of settlement fund payments under the Janssen Settlement
Agreement. An eligible Subdivision may elect to participate in either the Distributor Settlement
or the Janssen Settlement, or in both.
1 C-1
e) Opioid Defendant means any defendant (including but not limited to Johnson &
Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Purdue Pharma L.P., Cardinal Health, Inc.,
AmerisourceBergen Corporation, and McKesson Corporation) named in a lawsuit
seeking damages, abatement, or other remedies related to or caused by the opioid
public health crisis in any lawsuit brought by any state or local government on or
before October 1, 2020.
3. General Terms
This agreement is subject to the requirements of the Distributor Settlement Agreement, as well as
applicable law, and the Distributor Settlement Agreement governs over any inconsistent
provision of this CA Distributor Allocation Agreement. Terms used in this CA Distributor
Allocation Agreement have the same meaning as in the Distributor Settlement Agreement unless
otherwise defined herein.
Pursuant to Section V(D)(1) of the Distributor Settlement Agreement, (a) all Settlement Fund
payments will be used for Opioid Remediation, except as allowed by Section V(B)(2) of the
Distributor Settlement Agreement; and (b) at least seventy percent (70%) of Settlement Fund
payment amounts will be used solely for future Opioid Remediation.
4. State Allocation
The Settlement Fund payments to California,2 pursuant to the Distributor Settlement Agreement,
shall be allocated as follows: 15% to the State Fund; 70% to the Abatement Accounts Fund; and
15% to the Subdivision Fund. For the avoidance of doubt, all funds allocated to California from
the Settlement Fund shall be combined pursuant to this CA Distributor Allocation Agreement,
and 15% of that total shall be allocated to the State of California (the “State of California
Allocation”), 70% to the California Abatement Accounts Fund (“CA Abatement Accounts
Fund”), and 15% to the California Subdivision Fund (“CA Subdivision Fund”).
A. State of California Allocation
Fifteen percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the State and used by
the State for future Opioid Remediation.
B. CA Abatement Accounts Fund
i. Allocation of CA Abatement Accounts Funds
a) Seventy percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the CA
Abatement Accounts Fund. The funds in the CA Abatement Accounts Fund will be
2 For purposes of clarity, use of the term “California” refers to the geographic territory of
California and the state and its local governments therein. The term “State” or “State of
California” refers to the State of California as a governmental unit.
2 C-2
allocated based on the allocation model developed in connection with the proposed
negotiating class in the National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804), as
adjusted to reflect only those cities and counties that are eligible, based on population or
litigation status, to become a CA Participating Subdivision. The percentage from the CA
Abatement Accounts Fund allocated to each CA Participating Subdivision is set forth in
Appendix 1 in the column entitled abatement percentage (the “Local Allocation”). For
the avoidance of doubt, Litigating Special Districts and California towns, cities, and
counties with a population less than 10,000 are not eligible to receive an allocation of CA
Abatement Accounts Funds.
b) A CA Participating Subdivision that is a county, or a city and county, will be allocated its
Local Allocation share as of the date on which it becomes a Participating Subdivision,
and will receive payments as provided in the Distributor Settlement Agreement.
c) A CA Participating Subdivision that is a city will be allocated its Local Allocation share
as of the date on which it becomes a Participating Subdivision. The Local Allocation
share for a city that is a CA Participating Subdivision will be paid to the county in which
the city is located, rather than to the city, so long as: (a) the county is a CA Participating
Subdivision, and (b) the city has not advised the Settlement Fund Administrator that it
requests direct payment at least 60 days prior to a Payment Date. A Local Allocation
share allocated to a city but paid to a county is not required to be spent exclusively for
abatement activities in that city, but will become part of the county’s share of the CA
Abatement Accounts Funds, which will be used in accordance with Section 4.B.ii (Use of
CA Abatement Accounts Funds) and reported on in accordance with Section 4.B.iii (CA
Abatement Accounts Fund Oversight).
d) A city within a county that is a CA Participating Subdivision may opt in or out of direct
payment at any time, and it may also elect direct payment of only a portion of its share,
with the remainder going to the county, by providing notice to the Settlement Fund
Administrator at least 60 days prior to a Payment Date. For purposes of this CA
Distributor Allocation Agreement, the Cities of Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, San
Jose and Eureka will be deemed to have elected direct payment if they become
Participating Subdivisions.
e) The State will receive the Local Allocation share of any payment to the Settlement Fund
that is attributable to a county or city that is eligible to become a CA Participating
Subdivision, but that has not, as of the date of that payment to the Settlement Fund,
become a Participating Subdivision.
f) Funds received by a CA Participating Subdivision, and not expended or encumbered
within five years of receipt and in accordance with the Distributor Settlement Agreement
and this CA Distributor Allocation Agreement shall be transferred to the State; provided
however, that CA Participating Subdivisions have seven years to expend or encumber CA
Abatement Accounts Funds designated to support capital outlay projects before they must
be transferred to the State. This provision shall not apply to the Cost Reimbursement
Funds, which shall be controlled by Appendix 2.
3 C-3
ii. Use of CA Abatement Accounts Funds
a) The CA Abatement Accounts Funds will be used for future Opioid Remediation in one or
more of the areas described in the List of Opioid Remediation Uses, which is Exhibit E to
the Distributor Settlement Agreement.
b) In addition to this requirement, no less than 50% of the funds received by a CA
Participating Subdivision from the Abatement Accounts Fund in each calendar year will
be used for one or more of the following High Impact Abatement Activities:
(1) the provision of matching funds or operating costs for substance use disorder facilities
within the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program;
(2) creating new or expanded Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) treatment infrastructure;
(3) addressing the needs of communities of color and vulnerable populations (including
sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations) that are disproportionately impacted
by SUD;
(4) diversion of people with SUD from the justice system into treatment, including by
providing training and resources to first and early responders (sworn and non-sworn)
and implementing best practices for outreach, diversion and deflection, employability,
restorative justice, and harm reduction; and/or
(5) interventions to prevent drug addiction in vulnerable youth.
c) The California Department of Health Care Services (“DHCS”) may add to this list (but
not delete from it) by designating additional High Impact Abatement Activities. DHCS
will make reasonable efforts to consult with stakeholders, including the CA Participating
Subdivisions, before adding additional High Impact Abatement Activities to this list.
d) For the avoidance of doubt, and subject to the requirements of the Distributor Settlement
Agreement and applicable law, CA Participating Subdivisions may form agreements or
ventures, or otherwise work in collaboration with, federal, state, local, tribal or private
sector entities in pursuing Opioid Remediation activities funded from the CA Abatement
Accounts Fund. Further, provided that all CA Abatement Accounts Funds are used for
Opioid Remediation consistent with the Distributor Settlement Agreement and this CA
Distributor Allocation Agreement, a county and any cities or towns within the county
may agree to reallocate their respective shares of the CA Abatement Accounts Funds
among themselves, provided that any direct distribution may only be to a CA
Participating Subdivision and any CA Participating Subdivision must agree to their share
being reallocated.
4 C-4
iii. CA Abatement Accounts Fund Oversight
a) Pursuant to Section 5 below, CA Participating Subdivisions receiving settlement funds
must prepare and file reports annually regarding the use of those funds. DHCS may
regularly review the reports prepared by CA Participating Subdivisions about the use of
CA Abatement Accounts Funds for compliance with the Distributor Settlement
Agreement and this CA Distributor Allocation Agreement.
b) If DHCS determines that a CA Participating Subdivision’s use of CA Abatement
Accounts Funds is inconsistent with the Distributor Settlement Agreement or this CA
Distributor Allocation Agreement, whether through review of reports or information from
any other sources, DHCS shall send a request to meet and confer with the CA
Participating Subdivision. The parties shall meet and confer in an effort to resolve the
concern.
c) If the parties are unable to reach a resolution, DHCS may conduct an audit of the
Subdivision’s use of the CA Abatement Accounts Funds within one year of the request to
meet and confer, unless the parties mutually agree in writing to extend the meet and
confer time frame.
d) If the concern still cannot be resolved, the State may bring a motion or action in the court
where the State has filed its Consent Judgment to resolve the concern or otherwise
enforce the requirements of the Distributor Settlement Agreement or this CA Distributor
Allocation Agreement. However, in no case shall any audit be conducted, or motion be
brought, as to a specific expenditure of funds, more than five years after the date on
which the expenditure of the funds was reported to DHCS, in accordance with this
agreement.
e) Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement does not limit the statutory or
constitutional authority of any state or local agency or official to conduct audits,
investigations, or other oversight activities, or to pursue administrative, civil, or criminal
enforcement actions.
C. CA Subdivision Fund
i. Fifteen percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the CA
Subdivision Fund. All funds in the CA Subdivision Fund will be allocated among the
Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions. The funds will be used,
subject to any limits imposed by the Distributor Settlement Agreement and this CA
Distributor Allocation Agreement, to fund future Opioid Remediation and reimburse past
opioid-related expenses, which may include fees and expenses related to litigation, and to
pay the reasonable fees and expenses of the Special Master as set forth in Appendix 2.
5 C-5
The CA Subdivision Funds will be allocated as follows:
a) First, funds in the CA Subdivision Fund shall be used to pay the Special Master’s
reasonable fees and expenses in accordance with the procedures and limitations set
forth in Appendix 2 to this document;
b) Second, funds will be allocated to Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating
Subdivisions that have been awarded Costs, as defined by and in accordance with the
procedures and limitations set forth in Appendix 2 to this document.
c) Funds remaining in the CA Subdivision Fund, which shall consist of no less than 50%
of the total CA Subdivision Fund received in any year pursuant to Appendix 2,
Section 2.c.v, will be distributed to Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating
Subdivisions, in relative proportion to the Local Allocation. These funds shall be used
to fund future opioid-related projects and to reimburse past opioid-related expenses,
which may include fees and expenses related to litigation against any Opioid
Defendant.
D. Provision for State Back-Stop Agreement
On August 6, 2021, Judge Dan Polster of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio,
Eastern Division, issued an order (ECF Docket Number 3814) (“MDL Fees Order”) in the
National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804) “cap[ping] all applicable contingent fee
agreements at 15%.” Private counsel representing Plaintiff Subdivisions should seek its
contingency fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund or Cost Funds under the Distributor
Settlement Agreement and, if applicable, the Janssen Settlement Agreement.
A Plaintiff Subdivision may separately agree to use its share of the CA Subdivision Fund to pay
for fees or costs incurred by its contingency-fee counsel (“State Back-Stop Agreement”),
pursuant to Exhibit R, section I(R), of the Distributor Settlement Agreement and the MDL Fees
Order, so long as such contingency fees do not exceed a total contingency fee of 15% of the total
gross recovery of the Plaintiff Subdivision pursuant to the Distributor Settlement, and if
applicable, the Janssen Settlement, inclusive of contingency fees from the national Attorney Fee
Fund and this State Back-Stop Agreement. Before seeking fees or litigation costs and expenses
from a State Back-Stop Agreement, private counsel representing Plaintiff Subdivisions must first
seek contingency fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund or Cost Funds created under the
Distributor Settlement Agreement and, if applicable, the Janssen Settlement Agreement. Further,
private counsel may only seek reimbursement for litigation fees and costs that have not
previously been reimbursed through prior settlements or judgments.
To effectuate a State Back-Stop Agreement pursuant to this section, an agreement in the form of
Appendix 3 may be entered into by a Plaintiff Subdivision, private counsel, and the California
Office of the Attorney General. The California Office of the Attorney General shall, upon the
request of a Plaintiff Subdivision, execute any agreement executed by a Plaintiff Subdivision and
its private counsel if it is in the form of Appendix 3. The California Office of the Attorney
6 C-6
General will also consider requests from Plaintiff Subdivisions to execute and enter into
agreements presented in other forms.
For the avoidance of doubt, this agreement does not require a Plaintiff Subdivision to request or
enter into a State Back-Stop Agreement, and no State Back-Stop Agreement shall impose any
duty or obligation on the State of California or any of its agencies or officers, including without
limitation the Attorney General.
5. State and Subdivision Reporting
a) DHCS will prepare an annual written report regarding the State’s use of funds from the
settlement until those funds are fully expended and for one year thereafter. These reports
will be made publicly available on the DHCS web site.
b) Each CA Participating Subdivision that receives payments of funds from the settlement
will prepare written reports at least annually regarding the use of those funds, until those
funds are fully expended and for one year thereafter. These reports will also include a
certification that all funds that the CA Participating Subdivision has received through the
settlement have been used in compliance with the Distributor Settlement Agreement and
this CA Distributor Allocation Agreement. The report will be in a form reasonably
determined by DHCS. Prior to specifying the form of the report DHCS will confer with
representatives of the Plaintiff Subdivisions.
c) The State and all CA Participating Subdivisions receiving CA Abatement Accounts
Funds will track all deposits and expenditures. Each such subdivision is responsible
solely for the CA Abatement Accounts Funds it receives. A county is not responsible for
oversight, reporting, or monitoring of CA Abatement Accounts Funds received by a city
within that county that receives direct payment. Unless otherwise exempt, Subdivisions’
expenditures and uses of CA Abatement Accounts Funds and other Settlement Funds will
be subject to the normal budgetary and expenditure process of the Subdivision.
d) Each Plaintiff Subdivision receiving CA Subdivision Funds will track all deposits and
expenditures, as required by the Distributor Settlement Agreement and this CA
Distributor Allocation Agreement. Among other things, Plaintiff Subdivisions using
monies from the CA Subdivision Fund for purposes that do not qualify as Opioid
Remediation must identify and include in their annual report, the amount and how such
funds were used, including if used to pay attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, or litigation
costs. Pursuant to Section V(B)(2) of the Distributor Settlement Agreement, such
information must also be reported to the Settlement Fund Administrator and the
Distributors.
e) In each year in which DHCS prepares an annual report DHCS will also host a meeting to
discuss the annual report and the Opioid Remediation activities being carried out by the
State and Participating Subdivisions.
7 C-7
6. Miscellaneous
a) The State or any CA Participating Subdivision may bring a motion or action in the court
where the State has filed its Consent Judgment to enforce the requirements of this CA
Distributor Allocation Agreement. Before filing such a motion or action the State will
meet and confer with any CA Participating Subdivision that is the subject of the
anticipated motion or action, and vice versa.
b) Except as provided in the Distributor Settlement Agreement, this CA Distributor
Allocation Agreement is not enforceable by any party other than the State and the CA
Participating Subdivisions. It does not confer any rights or remedies upon, and shall not
be enforceable by, any third party.
c) Except as provided in the CA Distributor Allocation Agreement, if any provision of this
agreement or the application thereof to any person, entity, or circumstance shall, to any
extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement, or the application of
such provision to persons, entities, or circumstances other than those as to which it is
invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each other provision of this
agreement will be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.
d) Except as provided in the Distributor Settlement Agreement, this agreement shall be
governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of California.
8 C-8
APPENDIX 1 DISCLAIMER: The allocation percentages herein are estimates only and should not be relied on for decisions regarding legal rights, releases, waivers, or other decisions affecting current or potential legal claims. Percentages shown in the Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage column may change pursuant to Section 4.C. of the California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds—Distributor Settlement, whereas the percentages shown in the Abatement Percentage column should not change. Participating Subdivisions, underlying calculations, and the calculated allocation percentages are subject to change. Regarding the column herein entitled “Abatement Percentage,” pursuant to Section 4.B.e., the State of California will receive the Local Allocation share of any payment to the Settlement Fund that is attributable to a county or city that is eligible to become a CA Participating Subdivision, but that has not, as of the date of that payment to the Settlement Fund, become a Participating Subdivision. Regarding the column herein entitled “Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage,” payments allocated to a Plaintiff Subdivision, which is not an Initial Participating Subdivision, will be re-allocated among the Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions. Regarding the column herein entitled “Abatement Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the California Abatement Account Funds received, pursuant to Section 4.B. Regarding the column herein entitled “Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the California Subdivision Funds received, pursuant to Section 4.C. Regarding the column herein entitled “Weighted Allocation Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the combined and weighted allocation of the Abatement Percentage and the Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage. C-9
APPENDIX 1 100.000% 100.000% 100.000% Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage County Alameda County Alameda 2.332% 2.853% 2.4237952% City Alameda Alameda 0.069% 0.0570162% City Albany Alameda 0.013% 0.0107768% City Berkeley Alameda 0.152% 0.1249656% City Dublin Alameda 0.033% 0.040% 0.0338810% City Emeryville Alameda 0.023% 0.0185765% City Fremont Alameda 0.108% 0.0888576% City Hayward Alameda 0.117% 0.0966218% City Livermore Alameda 0.054% 0.0446740% City Newark Alameda 0.026% 0.0217626% City Oakland Alameda 0.486% 0.595% 0.5055601% City Piedmont Alameda 0.014% 0.0114064% City Pleasanton Alameda 0.067% 0.0554547% City San Leandro Alameda 0.039% 0.0321267% City Union City Alameda 0.043% 0.0352484% County Amador County Amador 0.226% 0.277% 0.2349885% County Butte County Butte 1.615% 1.975% 1.6783178% City Chico Butte 0.216% 0.264% 0.2246499% City Oroville Butte 0.079% 0.0646595% County Calaveras County Calaveras 0.226% 0.277% 0.2351644% County Colusa County Colusa 0.059% 0.0489221% County Contra Costa County Contra Costa 2.102% 2.571% 2.1844585% City Antioch Contra Costa 0.037% 0.0301879% City Brentwood Contra Costa 0.026% 0.0215339% City Clayton Contra Costa 0.002% 0.0018060% City Concord Contra Costa 0.055% 0.0456676% City Danville Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0082255% City El Cerrito Contra Costa 0.023% 0.0189024% City Hercules Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0078273% 1 of 15 C-10
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Lafayette Contra Costa 0.006% 0.0046030% City Martinez Contra Costa 0.012% 0.0098593% City Moraga Contra Costa 0.004% 0.0031007% City Oakley Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0079416% City Orinda Contra Costa 0.005% 0.0038157% City Pinole Contra Costa 0.013% 0.0110909% City Pittsburg Contra Costa 0.053% 0.0436369% City Pleasant Hill Contra Costa 0.013% 0.0106309% City Richmond Contra Costa 0.146% 0.1201444% City San Pablo Contra Costa 0.018% 0.0148843% City San Ramon Contra Costa 0.021% 0.0176459% City Walnut Creek Contra Costa 0.026% 0.0212132% County Del Norte County Del Norte 0.114% 0.140% 0.1189608% County El Dorado County El Dorado 0.768% 0.939% 0.7980034% City Placerville El Dorado 0.015% 0.0127642% City South Lake Tahoe El Dorado 0.081% 0.0665456% County Fresno County Fresno 1.895% 2.318% 1.9693410% City Clovis Fresno 0.065% 0.0536211% City Coalinga Fresno 0.012% 0.0098554% City Fresno Fresno 0.397% 0.3270605% City Kerman Fresno 0.005% 0.0042534% City Kingsburg Fresno 0.008% 0.0066167% City Mendota Fresno 0.002% 0.0019387% City Orange Cove Fresno 0.004% 0.0035607% City Parlier Fresno 0.008% 0.0069755% City Reedley Fresno 0.012% 0.0098804% City Sanger Fresno 0.018% 0.0146135% City Selma Fresno 0.015% 0.0127537% County Glenn County Glenn 0.107% 0.131% 0.1116978% County Humboldt County Humboldt 1.030% 1.260% 1.0703185% 2 of 15 C-11
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Arcata Humboldt 0.054% 0.0447660% City Eureka Humboldt 0.117% 0.143% 0.1216284% City Fortuna Humboldt 0.032% 0.0266837% County Imperial County Imperial 0.258% 0.315% 0.2679006% City Brawley Imperial 0.011% 0.0087986% City Calexico Imperial 0.019% 0.0152799% City El Centro Imperial 0.158% 0.1302522% City Imperial Imperial 0.006% 0.0048791% County Inyo County Inyo 0.073% 0.089% 0.0754413% County Kern County Kern 2.517% 3.079% 2.6159145% City Arvin Kern 0.006% 0.0046425% City Bakersfield Kern 0.212% 0.1747198% City California City Kern 0.009% 0.0070820% City Delano Kern 0.030% 0.0249316% City McFarland Kern 0.003% 0.0025644% City Ridgecrest Kern 0.015% 0.0120938% City Shafter Kern 0.013% 0.0103417% City Tehachapi Kern 0.009% 0.0073580% City Wasco Kern 0.008% 0.0069861% County Kings County Kings 0.293% 0.2413469% City Avenal Kings 0.007% 0.0056335% City Corcoran Kings 0.013% 0.0107032% City Hanford Kings 0.027% 0.0226038% City Lemoore Kings 0.016% 0.0131900% County Lake County Lake 0.795% 0.6545389% City Clearlake Lake 0.041% 0.050% 0.0426253% City Lakeport Lake 0.021% 0.026% 0.0222964% County Lassen County Lassen 0.319% 0.391% 0.3320610% City Susanville Lassen 0.027% 0.0219295% County Los Angeles County Los Angeles 13.896% 16.999% 14.4437559% 3 of 15 C-12
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Agoura Hills Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0040024% City Alhambra Los Angeles 0.042% 0.0343309% City Arcadia Los Angeles 0.033% 0.0267718% City Artesia Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0005100% City Azusa Los Angeles 0.026% 0.0210857% City Baldwin Park Los Angeles 0.027% 0.0218520% City Bell Los Angeles 0.008% 0.0068783% City Bellflower Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0014485% City Bell Gardens Los Angeles 0.014% 0.0114301% City Beverly Hills Los Angeles 0.065% 0.0534897% City Burbank Los Angeles 0.100% 0.0823132% City Calabasas Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0048948% City Carson Los Angeles 0.019% 0.0159805% City Cerritos Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039682% City Claremont Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0082584% City Commerce Los Angeles 0.000% 0.0002971% City Compton Los Angeles 0.044% 0.0361882% City Covina Los Angeles 0.028% 0.0229127% City Cudahy Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0006020% City Culver City Los Angeles 0.055% 0.0449894% City Diamond Bar Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0006993% City Downey Los Angeles 0.052% 0.0429994% City Duarte Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0027261% City El Monte Los Angeles 0.031% 0.038% 0.0318985% City El Segundo Los Angeles 0.033% 0.0268020% City Gardena Los Angeles 0.034% 0.0278088% City Glendale Los Angeles 0.166% 0.1366586% City Glendora Los Angeles 0.016% 0.0134411% City Hawaiian Gardens Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0040549% City Hawthorne Los Angeles 0.050% 0.0407833% 4 of 15 C-13
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Hermosa Beach Los Angeles 0.018% 0.0145307% City Huntington Park Los Angeles 0.023% 0.0190667% City Inglewood Los Angeles 0.059% 0.0489195% City La Cañada Flintridge Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0025565% City Lakewood Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039971% City La Mirada Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0081572% City Lancaster Los Angeles 0.045% 0.0369689% City La Puente Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0012999% City La Verne Los Angeles 0.024% 0.0194190% City Lawndale Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0017731% City Lomita Los Angeles 0.004% 0.0031940% City Long Beach Los Angeles 0.439% 0.3614151% City Los Angeles Los Angeles 2.715% 3.321% 2.8218811% City Lynwood Los Angeles 0.016% 0.0134345% City Malibu Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0019269% City Manhattan Beach Los Angeles 0.032% 0.0260686% City Maywood Los Angeles 0.004% 0.0035528% City Monrovia Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0254455% City Montebello Los Angeles 0.030% 0.0250670% City Monterey Park Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0256677% City Norwalk Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0258228% City Palmdale Los Angeles 0.046% 0.0375827% City Palos Verdes Estates Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0053102% City Paramount Los Angeles 0.011% 0.0091483% City Pasadena Los Angeles 0.146% 0.1200524% City Pico Rivera Los Angeles 0.022% 0.0183333% City Pomona Los Angeles 0.111% 0.0911933% City Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0012645% City Redondo Beach Los Angeles 0.062% 0.0506992% City Rosemead Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0028260% 5 of 15 C-14
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City San Dimas Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0022016% City San Fernando Los Angeles 0.013% 0.0104837% City San Gabriel Los Angeles 0.018% 0.0147726% City San Marino Los Angeles 0.009% 0.0073791% City Santa Clarita Los Angeles 0.022% 0.0178167% City Santa Fe Springs Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0257531% City Santa Monica Los Angeles 0.158% 0.1298513% City Sierra Madre Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0048646% City Signal Hill Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0084884% City South El Monte Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039603% City South Gate Los Angeles 0.020% 0.0166272% City South Pasadena Los Angeles 0.012% 0.0095334% City Temple City Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039498% City Torrance Los Angeles 0.112% 0.0919820% City Walnut Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0047305% City West Covina Los Angeles 0.049% 0.0404521% City West Hollywood Los Angeles 0.013% 0.0108517% City Whittier Los Angeles 0.032% 0.0260581% County Madera County Madera 0.349% 0.427% 0.3630669% City Chowchilla Madera 0.012% 0.0097332% City Madera Madera 0.039% 0.0318441% County Marin County Marin 0.564% 0.690% 0.5861325% City Larkspur Marin 0.015% 0.0124697% City Mill Valley Marin 0.020% 0.0168401% City Novato Marin 0.028% 0.0229824% City San Anselmo Marin 0.009% 0.0078062% City San Rafael Marin 0.089% 0.0729823% County Mariposa County Mariposa 0.084% 0.103% 0.0876131% County Mendocino County Mendocino 0.439% 0.536% 0.4558394% City Ukiah Mendocino 0.039% 0.0317153% 6 of 15 C-15
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage County Merced County Merced 0.551% 0.674% 0.5724262% City Atwater Merced 0.024% 0.0195846% City Livingston Merced 0.006% 0.0045873% City Los Banos Merced 0.020% 0.0165142% City Merced Merced 0.061% 0.0500762% County Modoc County Modoc 0.065% 0.080% 0.0678250% County Mono County Mono 0.023% 0.029% 0.0242606% County Monterey County Monterey 0.908% 1.111% 0.9437083% City Greenfield Monterey 0.006% 0.0050552% City King City Monterey 0.005% 0.0037355% City Marina Monterey 0.017% 0.0144098% City Monterey Monterey 0.041% 0.0336540% City Pacific Grove Monterey 0.009% 0.0074842% City Salinas Monterey 0.094% 0.0776576% City Seaside Monterey 0.023% 0.0191772% City Soledad Monterey 0.007% 0.0060870% County Napa County Napa 0.288% 0.352% 0.2994325% City American Canyon Napa 0.017% 0.0136869% City Napa Napa 0.078% 0.0642783% County Nevada County Nevada 0.441% 0.539% 0.4579827% City Grass Valley Nevada 0.024% 0.0197805% City Truckee Nevada 0.003% 0.0023843% County Orange County Orange 4.364% 5.339% 4.5363576% City Aliso Viejo Orange 0.014% 0.0113841% City Anaheim Orange 0.554% 0.678% 0.5759282% City Brea Orange 0.086% 0.0708897% City Buena Park Orange 0.087% 0.0714352% City Costa Mesa Orange 0.124% 0.152% 0.1288366% City Cypress Orange 0.033% 0.0271937% City Dana Point Orange 0.001% 0.0005560% 7 of 15 C-16
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Fountain Valley Orange 0.055% 0.0455980% City Fullerton Orange 0.137% 0.168% 0.1425744% City Garden Grove Orange 0.213% 0.1752482% City Huntington Beach Orange 0.247% 0.302% 0.2568420% City Irvine Orange 0.139% 0.170% 0.1442350% City Laguna Beach Orange 0.047% 0.058% 0.0493043% City Laguna Hills Orange 0.014% 0.0115457% City Laguna Niguel Orange 0.001% 0.0007071% City Laguna Woods Orange 0.001% 0.0006546% City La Habra Orange 0.060% 0.073% 0.0621049% City Lake Forest Orange 0.012% 0.0101249% City La Palma Orange 0.012% 0.0095439% City Los Alamitos Orange 0.008% 0.0069190% City Mission Viejo Orange 0.014% 0.0117560% City Newport Beach Orange 0.179% 0.1470134% City Orange Orange 0.150% 0.1231320% City Placentia Orange 0.029% 0.035% 0.0298912% City Rancho Santa Margarita Orange 0.001% 0.0006296% City San Clemente Orange 0.008% 0.010% 0.0086083% City San Juan Capistrano Orange 0.008% 0.0065510% City Santa Ana Orange 0.502% 0.614% 0.5213866% City Seal Beach Orange 0.020% 0.0165891% City Stanton Orange 0.035% 0.0291955% City Tustin Orange 0.073% 0.0600341% City Westminster Orange 0.104% 0.127% 0.1082721% City Yorba Linda Orange 0.044% 0.0362223% County Placer County Placer 1.045% 1.278% 1.0861002% City Auburn Placer 0.017% 0.0141114% City Lincoln Placer 0.031% 0.0255599% City Rocklin Placer 0.076% 0.0625485% 8 of 15 C-17
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Roseville Placer 0.196% 0.1616559% County Plumas County Plumas 0.205% 0.251% 0.2128729% County Riverside County Riverside 4.534% 5.547% 4.7128296% City Banning Riverside 0.017% 0.0143848% City Beaumont Riverside 0.021% 0.0171135% City Blythe Riverside 0.012% 0.0096714% City Canyon Lake Riverside 0.000% 0.0001761% City Cathedral City Riverside 0.067% 0.0553614% City Coachella Riverside 0.021% 0.0173054% City Corona Riverside 0.147% 0.1207083% City Desert Hot Springs Riverside 0.024% 0.0200433% City Eastvale Riverside 0.000% 0.0002747% City Hemet Riverside 0.051% 0.0421792% City Indio Riverside 0.056% 0.0457794% City Jurupa Valley Riverside 0.001% 0.0008991% City Lake Elsinore Riverside 0.021% 0.0172949% City La Quinta Riverside 0.063% 0.0516732% City Menifee Riverside 0.032% 0.0260909% City Moreno Valley Riverside 0.137% 0.1130348% City Murrieta Riverside 0.048% 0.059% 0.0497423% City Norco Riverside 0.016% 0.0134542% City Palm Desert Riverside 0.083% 0.0682465% City Palm Springs Riverside 0.076% 0.0629862% City Perris Riverside 0.009% 0.0076774% City Rancho Mirage Riverside 0.052% 0.0431098% City Riverside Riverside 0.268% 0.2206279% City San Jacinto Riverside 0.010% 0.0085936% City Temecula Riverside 0.022% 0.0180086% City Wildomar Riverside 0.008% 0.0062500% County Sacramento County Sacramento 3.797% 4.645% 3.9465887% 9 of 15 C-18
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Citrus Heights Sacramento 0.057% 0.0465312% City Elk Grove Sacramento 0.130% 0.1066994% City Folsom Sacramento 0.108% 0.0890850% City Galt Sacramento 0.017% 0.0143704% City Rancho Cordova Sacramento 0.008% 0.0067679% City Sacramento Sacramento 0.721% 0.882% 0.7496530% County San Benito County San Benito 0.106% 0.130% 0.1101417% City Hollister San Benito 0.027% 0.0225355% County San Bernardino County San Bernardino 3.259% 3.987% 3.3878124% City Adelanto San Bernardino 0.008% 0.0066640% City Apple Valley San Bernardino 0.025% 0.0207360% City Barstow San Bernardino 0.015% 0.0122056% City Chino San Bernardino 0.064% 0.0525893% City Chino Hills San Bernardino 0.001% 0.0006388% City Colton San Bernardino 0.031% 0.0253443% City Fontana San Bernardino 0.112% 0.0920543% City Grand Terrace San Bernardino 0.006% 0.0051051% City Hesperia San Bernardino 0.035% 0.0291522% City Highland San Bernardino 0.004% 0.0029061% City Loma Linda San Bernardino 0.009% 0.0071188% City Montclair San Bernardino 0.039% 0.0322108% City Ontario San Bernardino 0.179% 0.1472934% City Rancho Cucamonga San Bernardino 0.084% 0.0689431% City Redlands San Bernardino 0.057% 0.0469150% City Rialto San Bernardino 0.073% 0.0603206% City San Bernardino San Bernardino 0.178% 0.1461880% City Twentynine Palms San Bernardino 0.002% 0.0012605% City Upland San Bernardino 0.052% 0.0424460% City Victorville San Bernardino 0.033% 0.0269400% City Yucaipa San Bernardino 0.016% 0.0128772% 10 of 15 C-19
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Yucca Valley San Bernardino 0.003% 0.0021228% County San Diego County San Diego 5.706% 6.980% 5.9309748% City Carlsbad San Diego 0.128% 0.1050485% City Chula Vista San Diego 0.189% 0.231% 0.1961456% City Coronado San Diego 0.044% 0.0359095% City El Cajon San Diego 0.113% 0.0933582% City Encinitas San Diego 0.061% 0.074% 0.0630289% City Escondido San Diego 0.145% 0.1192204% City Imperial Beach San Diego 0.014% 0.0118283% City La Mesa San Diego 0.055% 0.068% 0.0575593% City Lemon Grove San Diego 0.022% 0.0183911% City National City San Diego 0.080% 0.0656808% City Oceanside San Diego 0.213% 0.1753428% City Poway San Diego 0.062% 0.0511040% City San Diego San Diego 1.975% 2.416% 2.0531169% City San Marcos San Diego 0.089% 0.0733897% City Santee San Diego 0.033% 0.0268401% City Solana Beach San Diego 0.017% 0.0138564% City Vista San Diego 0.052% 0.0425144% Consolidated San Francisco San Francisco 3.026% 3.702% 3.1457169% County San Joaquin County San Joaquin 1.680% 2.055% 1.7460399% City Lathrop San Joaquin 0.009% 0.0075394% City Lodi San Joaquin 0.053% 0.0439484% City Manteca San Joaquin 0.054% 0.0443454% City Ripon San Joaquin 0.013% 0.0104219% City Stockton San Joaquin 0.313% 0.383% 0.3256176% City Tracy San Joaquin 0.084% 0.0692047% County San Luis Obispo County San Luis Obispo 0.816% 0.999% 0.8484126% City Arroyo Grande San Luis Obispo 0.024% 0.0199053% City Atascadero San Luis Obispo 0.029% 0.0240680% 11 of 15 C-20
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City El Paso de Robles (Paso Robles) San Luis Obispo 0.043% 0.0353456% City Grover Beach San Luis Obispo 0.017% 0.0137881% City Morro Bay San Luis Obispo 0.020% 0.0160922% City San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo 0.077% 0.0637841% County San Mateo County San Mateo 1.074% 1.313% 1.1159599% City Belmont San Mateo 0.021% 0.0169860% City Burlingame San Mateo 0.019% 0.0152537% City Daly City San Mateo 0.044% 0.0363880% City East Palo Alto San Mateo 0.013% 0.0103982% City Foster City San Mateo 0.020% 0.0166101% City Half Moon Bay San Mateo 0.004% 0.0031638% City Hillsborough San Mateo 0.013% 0.0110029% City Menlo Park San Mateo 0.015% 0.0126209% City Millbrae San Mateo 0.013% 0.0105836% City Pacifica San Mateo 0.016% 0.0130625% City Redwood City San Mateo 0.056% 0.0463511% City San Bruno San Mateo 0.021% 0.0172161% City San Carlos San Mateo 0.013% 0.0108885% City San Mateo San Mateo 0.052% 0.0425841% City South San Francisco San Mateo 0.043% 0.0353943% County Santa Barbara County Santa Barbara 1.132% 1.385% 1.1768968% City Carpinteria Santa Barbara 0.001% 0.0008938% City Goleta Santa Barbara 0.004% 0.0028969% City Lompoc Santa Barbara 0.047% 0.0389379% City Santa Barbara Santa Barbara 0.122% 0.1004559% City Santa Maria Santa Barbara 0.058% 0.0479179% County Santa Clara County Santa Clara 2.404% 2.941% 2.4987553% City Campbell Santa Clara 0.014% 0.0112566% City Cupertino Santa Clara 0.008% 0.0066824% City Gilroy Santa Clara 0.025% 0.0202891% 12 of 15 C-21
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Los Altos Santa Clara 0.013% 0.0103338% City Los Gatos Santa Clara 0.013% 0.0103220% City Milpitas Santa Clara 0.036% 0.0298120% City Morgan Hill Santa Clara 0.015% 0.0124619% City Mountain View Santa Clara 0.041% 0.0334608% City Palo Alto Santa Clara 0.039% 0.0323080% City San Jose Santa Clara 0.294% 0.360% 0.3054960% City Santa Clara Santa Clara 0.067% 0.0549723% City Saratoga Santa Clara 0.004% 0.0034161% City Sunnyvale Santa Clara 0.053% 0.0434069% County Santa Cruz County Santa Cruz 0.783% 0.957% 0.8135396% City Capitola Santa Cruz 0.020% 0.0168191% City Santa Cruz Santa Cruz 0.143% 0.1180348% City Scotts Valley Santa Cruz 0.015% 0.0126525% City Watsonville Santa Cruz 0.063% 0.0520136% County Shasta County Shasta 1.095% 1.339% 1.1380191% City Anderson Shasta 0.024% 0.0198896% City Redding Shasta 0.284% 0.2334841% City Shasta Lake Shasta 0.004% 0.0031993% County Siskiyou County Siskiyou 0.228% 0.279% 0.2373393% County Solano County Solano 0.760% 0.6260795% City Benicia Solano 0.031% 0.0253903% City Dixon Solano 0.016% 0.0130849% City Fairfield Solano 0.109% 0.0897317% City Suisun City Solano 0.021% 0.0176183% City Vacaville Solano 0.119% 0.0976497% City Vallejo Solano 0.167% 0.1373644% County Sonoma County Sonoma 1.218% 1.490% 1.2661290% City Healdsburg Sonoma 0.032% 0.0266929% City Petaluma Sonoma 0.081% 0.0667507% 13 of 15 C-22
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Rohnert Park Sonoma 0.041% 0.0340759% City Santa Rosa Sonoma 0.184% 0.1519070% City Sonoma Sonoma 0.022% 0.0183438% City Windsor Sonoma 0.016% 0.0129298% County Stanislaus County Stanislaus 1.722% 1.4182273% City Ceres Stanislaus 0.041% 0.0340260% City Modesto Stanislaus 0.217% 0.1788759% City Newman Stanislaus 0.006% 0.0046964% City Oakdale Stanislaus 0.018% 0.0145531% City Patterson Stanislaus 0.015% 0.0126590% City Riverbank Stanislaus 0.010% 0.0085699% City Turlock Stanislaus 0.065% 0.0531966% County Sutter County Sutter 0.306% 0.374% 0.3179548% City Yuba City Sutter 0.074% 0.0606242% County Tehama County Tehama 0.213% 0.261% 0.2216654% City Red Bluff Tehama 0.014% 0.0117771% County Trinity County Trinity 0.082% 0.101% 0.0855476% County Tulare County Tulare 0.809% 0.990% 0.8410949% City Dinuba Tulare 0.014% 0.0116929% City Exeter Tulare 0.004% 0.0032479% City Farmersville Tulare 0.003% 0.0027879% City Lindsay Tulare 0.007% 0.0057111% City Porterville Tulare 0.021% 0.0171845% City Tulare Tulare 0.037% 0.0302273% City Visalia Tulare 0.066% 0.0545872% County Tuolumne County Tuolumne 0.486% 0.594% 0.5047621% County Ventura County Ventura 2.192% 2.681% 2.2781201% City Camarillo Ventura 0.002% 0.0012815% City Fillmore Ventura 0.002% 0.0020294% City Moorpark Ventura 0.008% 0.0067337% 14 of 15 C-23
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Oxnard Ventura 0.156% 0.190% 0.1617338% City Port Hueneme Ventura 0.021% 0.0174145% City San Buenaventura (Ventura) Ventura 0.085% 0.0702181% City Santa Paula Ventura 0.014% 0.0119072% City Simi Valley Ventura 0.065% 0.0533043% City Thousand Oaks Ventura 0.022% 0.0179902% County Yolo County Yolo 0.357% 0.437% 0.3713319% City Davis Yolo 0.055% 0.0451747% City West Sacramento Yolo 0.066% 0.0544321% City Woodland Yolo 0.058% 0.0477904% County Yuba County Yuba 0.214% 0.262% 0.2225679% City Marysville Yuba 0.014% 0.0112079% 15 of 15 C-24
APPENDIX 2
Cost Reimbursement Procedure
1. Additional defined terms:
a) Costs means the reasonable amounts paid for the attorney and other City Attorney and
County Counsel staff time for individuals employed by a Plaintiff Subdivision at the
contractual rate, inclusive of benefits and overhead, together with amounts paid for court
reporters, experts, copying, electronic research, travel, vendors, and the like, which were
paid or incurred (i) prior to July 21, 2021 in litigation against any Opioid Defendant
and/or (ii) in negotiating and drafting this CA Distributor Allocation Agreement. Costs
does not include attorneys’ fees, costs, or expenses incurred by private contingency fee
counsel. No part of the CA Abatement Accounts Fund will be used to reimburse Costs.
b) First Claims Date means October 1, 2023 or when all applications for reimbursement of
Costs, in whole or in part, from funds available under Section X and Exhibit R of the
Distributor Settlement Agreement or Section XI and Exhibit R of the Janssen Settlement
Agreement, have been finally determined under the provisions of those agreements,
whichever comes first.
c) Special Master means a retired judicial officer or former public lawyer, not presently
employed or retained by a Plaintiff Subdivision, who will aggregate, review, and
determine the reasonable Costs to be awarded to each Plaintiff Subdivision that submits a
claim for reimbursement of Costs. The Special Master will be selected by a majority vote
of the votes cast by Plaintiff Subdivisions, with each such subdivision having one vote.
d) Plaintiff Subdivision Committee means the committee of Plaintiff Subdivisions that will
review and approve the invoices submitted by the Special Master reflecting his or her
reasonable time and expenses.
2. Cost Reimbursement to Plaintiff Subdivision
a) Purpose. Substantial resources have been expended to hold Opioid Defendants
accountable for creating and profiting from the opioid crisis, and this effort has been a
significant catalyst in creating a National Opioid Settlement with Distributors, Johnson &
Johnson, and others.
b) Claims Procedure.
i. If a Plaintiff Subdivision is eligible to seek reimbursement of Costs, in whole or in
part, from funds available under Section X or Exhibit R of the Distributor
Settlement Agreement or Section XI or Exhibit R of the Janssen Settlement
Agreement, it must first make a timely application for reimbursement from such
funds. To allow sufficient time for determination of those applications, no claim for
1 C-25
Costs to the CA Subdivision Fund under this Agreement may be made before the
First Claims Date.
ii. A Plaintiff Subdivision that wishes to be reimbursed from the CA Subdivision Fund
must submit a claim to the Special Master no later than forty-five (45) days after the
First Claims Date. The Special Master will then compile and redistribute the
aggregated claim totals for each Plaintiff Subdivision via email to representatives of
all the Plaintiff Subdivisions. A claim for attorney and staff time must list, for each
attorney or staff member included in the claim, the following information: name,
title, total hours claimed, hourly rate (including, if sought, benefits and share of
overhead), and narrative summarizing the general nature of the work performed by
the attorney or staff member. For reimbursement of “hard” costs, the subdivision
may aggregate across a category (e.g., total for travel costs). It is the intention of the
Plaintiff Subdivisions that submission of documents related to reimbursement of
Costs does not waive any attorney-client privilege or exemptions to the California
Public Records Act.
iii. The Special Master may request, at his or her sole option, additional documents or
details to assist in the final award of Costs.
iv. The Special Master will review claims for reasonableness and will notify each
Plaintiff Subdivision of the final determination of its claim, and will provide a list of
all final awards to all Plaintiff Subdivisions by email or, upon request, via First
Class U.S. Mail. Any Plaintiff Subdivision may ask the Special Master to reconsider
any final award within twenty-one (21) days. The Special Master will make a final
determination on any such reconsideration request within thirty (30) days of receipt.
v. Any decision of the Special Master is final and binding, and will be considered
under the California Arbitration Act, Code of Civil Procedure section 1280 et seq.
as a final arbitration award. Nothing in this agreement is intended to expand the
scope of judicial review of the final award for errors of fact or law, and the Parties
agree that they may only seek to vacate the award if clear and convincing evidence
demonstrates one of the factors set forth in Code of Civil Procedure, section 1286.2,
subdivision (a). Plaintiff Subdivisions will have fourteen (14) days after all final
awards are made, together with any final determination of a request for
reconsideration, to seek review in the Superior Court of California, pursuant to Code
of Civil Procedure, section 1285, where the State has filed its Consent Judgment.
vi. The Special Master will prepare a report of Costs that includes his or her fees and
expenses at least ninety (90) days before the Payment Date for each Annual
Payment. The Special Master’s preparation of a report of Costs does not discharge a
Plaintiff Subdivision’s reporting requirement under Section V.B.2 of the Distributor
Agreement.
vii. A member of the Plaintiff Subdivision Committee, which is a CA Participating
Subdivision, will submit to the Settlement Fund Administrator and the Distributors a
2 C-26
report of the fees and expenses incurred by the Special Master pursuant to Section
V.B.2 of the Distributor Agreement.
c) Claims Priority and Limitation.
i. The Special Master will submit invoices for compensation of reasonable fees and
expenses to the Plaintiff Subdivision Committee no later than ninety (90) days prior
to the Payment Date for each Annual Payment. The Plaintiff Subdivision Committee
will promptly review and, if reasonable, approve the Special Master’s invoice for
compensation. The Plaintiff Subdivision Committee will submit approved invoices
to the Settlement Fund Administrator for payment. The Special Master’s approved
invoices have priority and will be paid first from the CA Subdivision Fund before
any award of Costs, subject to the limitation in Section 2.c.v below.
ii. Final Awards of Costs that do not exceed seventy-five thousand dollars
($75,000.00) will be paid next in priority after the Special Master’s approved
invoices.
iii. Final Awards of Costs in excess of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) will
be paid proportionally from the funds remaining in that year’s Annual Payment.
iv. Any claim for Costs that is not paid in full will be allocated against the next year’s
distribution from the CA Subdivision Fund, until all approved claims for Costs are
paid in full.
v. In no event will more than 50% of the total CA Subdivision Fund received in any
year be used to pay Costs or the Special Master’s approved invoices.
vi. In no event shall more than $28 million of the total CA Subdivision Funds paid
pursuant to the Distributor Settlement Agreement and the Janssen Settlement
Agreement be used to pay Costs.
d) Collateral Source Payments and Third-Party Settlement.
i. In the event a Plaintiff Subdivision is awarded compensation, in whole or in part, by
any source of funds created as a result of litigation against an Opioid Defendant for
its reasonable Costs, it will reduce its claim for Costs from the CA Subdivision
Fund by that amount. If a Plaintiff Subdivision has already received a final award of
Costs from the CA Subdivision Fund, it will repay the fund up to the prior award of
Costs via a payment to the Settlement Fund Administrator or notify the Settlement
Fund Administrator that its allocation from the next and subsequent Annual
Payments should be reduced accordingly. If the Plaintiff Subdivision is repaying
any prior award of Costs, that repayment will occur as soon as is feasible after the
Plaintiff Subdivision’s receipt of Cost funds from the collateral source, but no more
than 90 days after its receipt from the collateral source. The Settlement Fund
Administrator will add any repaid Costs to the CA Subdivision Fund.
3 C-27
ii. In the event a Plaintiff Subdivision reaches a monetary settlement or compromise
against any Opioid Defendant outside of the National Opioid Settlement, the
monetary portion of such settlement, net of fees paid to outside contingency fee
counsel and of funds earmarked strictly for abatement, will be credited against its
Costs and the subdivision will be ineligible to recover those credited Costs from the
CA Subdivision Fund. Plaintiff Subdivisions negotiating monetary settlements or
compromises against any Opioid Defendant outside of the National Opioid
Settlement will negotiate for funds to repay any Costs it previously received from
the CA Subdivision Fund or for Costs it otherwise might be eligible to claim from
the CA Subdivision Fund. If such a settlement is paid after all final approved claims
for Costs by all Plaintiff Subdivisions are satisfied in full, the settling subdivision
will reimburse the CA Subdivision Fund in that amount by making payment to the
Settlement Fund Administrator to add to the CA Subdivision Fund in a manner
consistent with the repayments described in section 2.d.i above.
4 C-28
APPENDIX 3
CALIFORNIA-SUBDIVISION BACKSTOP AGREEMENT
On August 6, 2021, Judge Polster of the US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
issued an Order (the Order), docket number 3814, in In Re National Prescription Opiate
Litigation, MDL 2804, addressing contingent attorney fee contracts between political
subdivisions eligible to participate in the Distributors Settlement and their counsel.
In light of the Order, and at the request of [SUBDIVISION], the [SUBDIVISION], its counsel
[COUNSEL], and the California Attorney General, on behalf of the State of California, are
entering into this California-Subdivision Backstop Agreement (Backstop Agreement).
[SUBDIVISION] and [COUNSEL] intend this Backstop Agreement to constitute a State Back-
Stop Agreement as that term is used in the Order and in Exhibit R (Agreement on Attorneys’
Fees, Expenses and Costs) of the Distributor Settlement Agreement.
Pursuant to this Backstop Agreement, [SUBDIVISION] may, subject to the limitations of the
Distributor Settlement Agreement and CA Distributor Allocation Agreement, as well as any
other limitations imposed by law, use funds that it receives from the Distributor Settlement CA
Subdivision Fund to pay a contingent fee to [COUNSEL]. Any such payment from
[SUBDIVISION] to [COUNSEL], together with any contingency fees that [COUNSEL] may
receive from the national Attorney Fee Fund, will not exceed a total contingency fee of
[PERCENTAGE NOT TO EXCEED 15%] of the total gross recovery of [SUBDIVISION] from
the Distributors Settlement.
[COUNSEL] certify that they first sought fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund created
under the Distributor Settlement Agreement before seeking or accepting payment under this
backstop agreement. [COUNSEL] further certify that they are not seeking and will not accept
payment under this backstop agreement of any litigation fees or costs that have been reimbursed
through prior settlements or judgments.
The Attorney General is executing this agreement solely because the definition of “State Back-
Stop Agreement” in Exhibit R of the Distributor Settlement Agreement requires such agreements
to be between “a Settling State” and private counsel for a participating subdivision. Neither the
California Attorney General nor the State of California have any obligations under this Backstop
Agreement, and this Backstop Agreement does not require the payment of any state funds to
[SUBDIVISION], [COUNSEL], or any other party.
[DATE] [SUBDIVISION SIGNATURE BLOCK]
[DATE] [COUNSEL SIGNATURE BLOCK]
[DATE] [ATTORNEY GENERAL SIGNATURE BLOCK]
C-29
1
Settlement Participation Form
Governmental Entity: Rancho Palos Verdes city State: CA
Authorized Signatory: /officialname/
Address 1: /address1/
Address 2: /address2/
City, State, Zip: /cit/ /state/ /zi/
Phone: /Phone/
Email: /email/
The governmental entity identified above (“Governmental Entity”), in order to obtain and in
consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to the Settlement
Agreement dated July 21, 2021 (“Janssen Settlement”), and acting through the undersigned
authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Janssen Settlement, release all Released
Claims against all Released Entities, and agrees as follows.
1. The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Janssen Settlement,
understands that all terms in this Election and Release have the meanings defined
therein, and agrees that by this Election, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in
the Janssen Settlement and become a Participating Subdivision as provided therein.
2. The Governmental Entity shall, within 14 days of the Reference Date and prior to the
filing of the Consent Judgment, dismiss with prejudice any Released Claims that it has
filed.
3. The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Janssen Settlement pertaining to
Subdivisions as defined therein.
4. By agreeing to the terms of the Janssen Settlement and becoming a Releasor, the
Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable,
monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date.
5. The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the
Janssen Settlement solely for the purposes provided therein.
6. The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court in the Governmental
Entity’s state where the Consent Judgment is filed for purposes limited to that court’s role
as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the Janssen Settlement.
7. The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Janssen Settlement as provided
therein.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5424A4CE-BF8C-422B-A75D-56F5E6DF1C20
D-1
I
2
8.The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for
all purposes in the Janssen Settlement, including but not limited to all provisions of
Section IV (Release), and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards,
commissions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in
their official capacity elected or appointed to serve any of the foregoing and any agency,
person, or other entity claiming by or through any of the foregoing, and any other entity
identified in the definition of Releasor, provides for a release to the fullest extent of its
authority. As a Releasor, the Governmental Entity hereby absolutely, unconditionally,
and irrevocably covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be
brought, filed, or claimed, or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released
Claims against any Released Entity in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for
in the Janssen Settlement are intended by the Parties to be broad and shall be interpreted
so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar against any liability relating
in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the
Governmental Entity to release claims. The Janssen Settlement shall be a complete bar to
any Released Claim.
9.In connection with the releases provided for in the Janssen Settlement, each
Governmental Entity expressly waives, releases, and forever discharges any and
all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law of any state or territory of
the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law, which is
similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which
reads:
General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to claims that
the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or
her favor at the time of executing the release that, if known by him or her,
would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or
released party.
A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it
knows, believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each
Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles,
releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released Claims that may
exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist, whether
through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and
which, if known, would materially affect the Governmental Entities’ decision to
participate in the Janssen Settlement.
10.Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Janssen Settlement, to
which Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent this Election and Release is
interpreted differently from the Janssen Settlement in any respect, the Janssen Settlement
controls.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5424A4CE-BF8C-422B-A75D-56F5E6DF1C20
D-2
3
I swear under penalty of perjury that I have all necessary power and authorization to execute
this Election and Release on behalf of the Governmental Entity.
Signature:/signer_1/
Name:/name_1/
Title:/title_1/
Date:/date_1/
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5424A4CE-BF8C-422B-A75D-56F5E6DF1C20
D-3
Proposed California State-Subdivision Agreement
Regarding Distribution and Use of
Settlement Funds – Janssen Settlement
1. Introduction
Pursuant to the Janssen Settlement Agreement, dated as of July 21, 2021, and any revision
thereto (the “Janssen Settlement Agreement”), including Section VI and Exhibit O, the State of
California proposes this agreement (the “CA Janssen Allocation Agreement”) to govern the
allocation, distribution, and use of Settlement Fund payments made to California pursuant to
Sections V and VI of the Janssen Settlement Agreement.1 For the avoidance of doubt, this
agreement does not apply to payments made pursuant to Sections X or XI of the Janssen
Settlement Agreement.
Pursuant to Exhibit O, Paragraph 4, of the Janssen Settlement Agreement, acceptance of this CA
Janssen Allocation Agreement is a requirement to be an Initial Participating Subdivision.
2. Definitions
a) CA Participating Subdivision means a Participating Subdivision that is also (a) a
Plaintiff Subdivision and/or (b) a Primary Subdivision with a population equal to or
greater than 10,000. For the avoidance of doubt, eligible CA Participating
Subdivisions are those California subdivisions listed in Exhibit C (excluding
Litigating Special Districts) and/or Exhibit I to the Janssen Settlement Agreement.
b) Distributor Settlement Agreement means the Distributor Settlement Agreement dated
July 21, 2021, and any revision thereto.
c) CA Litigating Special District means a Litigating Special District located in
California. CA Litigating Special Districts include Downey Unified School District,
Elk Grove Unified School District, Kern High School District, Montezuma Fire
Protection District (located in Stockton, California), Santa Barbara San Luis Obispo
Regional Health Authority, Inland Empire Health Plan, Health Plan of San Joaquin,
and LA Care Health Plan.
d) Plaintiff Subdivision means a Subdivision located in California, other than a CA
Litigating Special District, that filed a lawsuit, on behalf of the Subdivision and/or
through an official of the Subdivision on behalf of the People of the State of
California, against one or more Opioid Defendants prior to October 1, 2020.
e) Opioid Defendant means any defendant (including but not limited to Johnson &
Johnson, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Purdue Pharma L.P., Cardinal Health, Inc.,
1 A parallel but separate agreement (the “CA Distributor Allocation Agreement”) will govern the
allocation, distribution, and use of settlement fund payments under the Distributor Settlement
Agreement. An eligible Subdivision may elect to participate in either the Distributor Settlement
or the Janssen Settlement, or in both.
1 E-1
AmerisourceBergen Corporation, and McKesson Corporation) named in a lawsuit
seeking damages, abatement, or other remedies related to or caused by the opioid
public health crisis in any lawsuit brought by any state or local government on or
before October 1, 2020.
3. General Terms
This agreement is subject to the requirements of the Janssen Settlement Agreement, as well as
applicable law, and the Janssen Settlement Agreement governs over any inconsistent provision
of this CA Janssen Allocation Agreement. Terms used in this CA Janssen Allocation Agreement
have the same meaning as in the Janssen Settlement Agreement unless otherwise defined herein.
Pursuant to Section VI(D)(1) of the Janssen Settlement Agreement, (a) all Settlement Fund
payments will be used for Opioid Remediation, except as allowed by Section VI(B)(2) of the
Janssen Settlement Agreement; and (b) at least seventy percent (70%) of Settlement Fund
payment amounts will be used solely for future Opioid Remediation.
4. State Allocation
The Settlement Fund payments to California,2 pursuant to the Janssen Settlement Agreement,
shall be allocated as follows: 15% to the State Fund; 70% to the Abatement Accounts Fund; and
15% to the Subdivision Fund. For the avoidance of doubt, all funds allocated to California from
the Settlement Fund shall be combined pursuant to this CA Janssen Allocation Agreement, and
15% of that total shall be allocated to the State of California (the “State of California
Allocation”), 70% to the California Abatement Accounts Fund (“CA Abatement Accounts
Fund”), and 15% to the California Subdivision Fund (“CA Subdivision Fund”).
A. State of California Allocation
Fifteen percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the State and used by
the State for future Opioid Remediation.
B. CA Abatement Accounts Fund
i. Allocation of CA Abatement Accounts Funds
a) Seventy percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the CA
Abatement Accounts Fund. The funds in the CA Abatement Accounts Fund will be
allocated based on the allocation model developed in connection with the proposed
negotiating class in the National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804), as
adjusted to reflect only those cities and counties that are eligible, based on population or
litigation status, to become a CA Participating Subdivision. The percentage from the CA
2 For purposes of clarity, use of the term “California” refers to the geographic territory of
California and the state and its local governments therein. The term “State” or “State of
California” refers to the State of California as a governmental unit.
2 E-2
Abatement Accounts Fund allocated to each CA Participating Subdivision is set forth in
Appendix 1 in the column entitled abatement percentage (the “Local Allocation”). For
the avoidance of doubt, CA Litigating Special Districts and California towns, cities, and
counties with a population less than 10,000 are not eligible to receive an allocation of CA
Abatement Accounts Funds.
b) A CA Participating Subdivision that is a county, or a city and county, will be allocated its
Local Allocation share as of the date on which it becomes a Participating Subdivision,
and will receive payments as provided in the Janssen Settlement Agreement.
c) A CA Participating Subdivision that is a city will be allocated its Local Allocation share
as of the date on which it becomes a Participating Subdivision. The Local Allocation
share for a city that is a CA Participating Subdivision will be paid to the county in which
the city is located, rather than to the city, so long as: (a) the county is a CA Participating
Subdivision, and (b) the city has not advised the Settlement Fund Administrator that it
requests direct payment at least 60 days prior to a Payment Date. A Local Allocation
share allocated to a city but paid to a county is not required to be spent exclusively for
abatement activities in that city, but will become part of the county’s share of the CA
Abatement Accounts Funds, which will be used in accordance with Section 4.B.ii (Use of
CA Abatement Accounts Funds) and reported on in accordance with Section 4.B.iii (CA
Abatement Accounts Fund Oversight).
d) A city within a county that is a CA Participating Subdivision may opt in or out of direct
payment at any time, and it may also elect direct payment of only a portion of its share,
with the remainder going to the county, by providing notice to the Settlement Fund
Administrator at least 60 days prior to a Payment Date. For purposes of this CA Janssen
Allocation Agreement, the Cities of Los Angeles, Oakland, San Diego, San Jose and
Eureka will be deemed to have elected direct payment if they become Participating
Subdivisions.
e) The State will receive the Local Allocation share of any payment to the Settlement Fund
that is attributable to a county or city that is eligible to become a CA Participating
Subdivision, but that has not, as of the date of that payment to the Settlement Fund,
become a Participating Subdivision.
f) Funds received by a CA Participating Subdivision, and not expended or encumbered
within five years of receipt and in accordance with the Janssen Settlement Agreement and
this CA Janssen Allocation Agreement shall be transferred to the State; provided
however, that CA Participating Subdivisions have seven years to expend or encumber CA
Abatement Accounts Funds designated to support capital outlay projects before they must
be transferred to the State. This provision shall not apply to the Cost Reimbursement
Funds, which shall be controlled by Appendix 2.
3 E-3
ii. Use of CA Abatement Accounts Funds
a) The CA Abatement Accounts Funds will be used for future Opioid Remediation in one or
more of the areas described in the List of Opioid Remediation Uses, which is Exhibit E to
the Janssen Settlement Agreement.
b) In addition to this requirement, no less than 50% of the funds received by a CA
Participating Subdivision from the Abatement Accounts Fund in each calendar year will
be used for one or more of the following High Impact Abatement Activities:
(1) the provision of matching funds or operating costs for substance use disorder facilities
within the Behavioral Health Continuum Infrastructure Program;
(2) creating new or expanded Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) treatment infrastructure;
(3) addressing the needs of communities of color and vulnerable populations (including
sheltered and unsheltered homeless populations) that are disproportionately impacted
by SUD;
(4) diversion of people with SUD from the justice system into treatment, including by
providing training and resources to first and early responders (sworn and non-sworn)
and implementing best practices for outreach, diversion and deflection, employability,
restorative justice, and harm reduction; and/or
(5) interventions to prevent drug addiction in vulnerable youth.
c) The California Department of Health Care Services (“DHCS”) may add to this list (but
not delete from it) by designating additional High Impact Abatement Activities. DHCS
will make reasonable efforts to consult with stakeholders, including the CA Participating
Subdivisions, before adding additional High Impact Abatement Activities to this list.
d) For the avoidance of doubt, and subject to the requirements of the Janssen Settlement
Agreement and applicable law, CA Participating Subdivisions may form agreements or
ventures, or otherwise work in collaboration with, federal, state, local, tribal or private
sector entities in pursuing Opioid Remediation activities funded from the CA Abatement
Accounts Fund. Further, provided that all CA Abatement Accounts Funds are used for
Opioid Remediation consistent with the Janssen Settlement Agreement and this CA
Janssen Allocation Agreement, a county and any cities or towns within the county may
agree to reallocate their respective shares of the CA Abatement Accounts Funds among
themselves, provided that any direct distribution may only be to a CA Participating
Subdivision and any CA Participating Subdivision must agree to their share being
reallocated.
4 E-4
iii. CA Abatement Accounts Fund Oversight
a) Pursuant to Section 5 below, CA Participating Subdivisions receiving settlement funds
must prepare and file reports annually regarding the use of those funds. DHCS may
regularly review the reports prepared by CA Participating Subdivisions about the use of
CA Abatement Accounts Funds for compliance with the Janssen Settlement Agreement
and this CA Janssen Allocation Agreement.
b) If DHCS determines that a CA Participating Subdivision’s use of CA Abatement
Accounts Funds is inconsistent with the Janssen Settlement Agreement or this CA
Janssen Allocation Agreement, whether through review of reports or information from
any other sources, DHCS shall send a request to meet and confer with the CA
Participating Subdivision. The parties shall meet and confer in an effort to resolve the
concern.
c) If the parties are unable to reach a resolution, DHCS may conduct an audit of the
Subdivision’s use of the CA Abatement Accounts Funds within one year of the request to
meet and confer, unless the parties mutually agree in writing to extend the meet and
confer time frame.
d) If the concern still cannot be resolved, the State may bring a motion or action in the court
where the State has filed its Consent Judgment to resolve the concern or otherwise
enforce the requirements of the Janssen Settlement Agreement or this CA Janssen
Allocation Agreement. However, in no case shall any audit be conducted, or motion be
brought, as to a specific expenditure of funds, more than five years after the date on
which the expenditure of the funds was reported to DHCS, in accordance with this
agreement.
e) Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Agreement does not limit the statutory or
constitutional authority of any state or local agency or official to conduct audits,
investigations, or other oversight activities, or to pursue administrative, civil, or criminal
enforcement actions.
C. CA Subdivision Fund
i. Fifteen percent of the total Settlement Fund payments will be allocated to the CA
Subdivision Fund. All funds in the CA Subdivision Fund will be allocated among the
Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions. The funds will be used,
subject to any limits imposed by the Janssen Settlement Agreement and this CA Janssen
Allocation Agreement, to fund future Opioid Remediation and reimburse past opioid-
related expenses, which may include fees and expenses related to litigation, and to pay
the reasonable fees and expenses of the Special Master as set forth in Appendix 2.
5 E-5
The CA Subdivision Funds will be allocated as follows:
a) First, funds in the CA Subdivision Fund shall be used to pay the Special Master’s
reasonable fees and expenses in accordance with the procedures and limitations set
forth in Appendix 2 to this document;
b) Second, funds will be allocated to Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating
Subdivisions that have been awarded Costs, as defined by and in accordance with the
procedures and limitations set forth in Appendix 2 to this document.
c) Funds remaining in the CA Subdivision Fund, which shall consist of no less than 50%
of the total CA Subdivision Fund received in any year pursuant to Appendix 2,
Section 2.c.v, will be distributed to Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating
Subdivisions, in relative proportion to the Local Allocation. These funds shall be used
to fund future opioid-related projects and to reimburse past opioid-related expenses,
which may include fees and expenses related to litigation against any Opioid
Defendant.
D. Provision for State Back-Stop Agreement
On August 6, 2021, Judge Dan Polster of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio,
Eastern Division, issued an order (ECF Docket Number 3814) (“MDL Fees Order”) in the
National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804) “cap[ping] all applicable contingent fee
agreements at 15%.” Private counsel representing Plaintiff Subdivisions should seek its
contingency fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund or Cost Funds under the Janssen
Settlement Agreement and, if applicable, the Distributor Settlement Agreement.
A Plaintiff Subdivision may separately agree to use its share of the CA Subdivision Fund to pay
for fees or costs incurred by its contingency-fee counsel (“State Back-Stop Agreement”),
pursuant to Exhibit R, section I(R), of the Janssen Settlement Agreement and the MDL Fees
Order, so long as such contingency fees do not exceed a total contingency fee of 15% of the total
gross recovery of the Plaintiff Subdivision pursuant to the Janssen Settlement, and if applicable,
the Distributor Settlement, inclusive of contingency fees from the national Attorney Fee Fund
and this State Back-Stop Agreement. Before seeking fees or litigation costs and expenses from a
State Back-Stop Agreement, private counsel representing Plaintiff Subdivisions must first seek
contingency fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund or Cost Funds created under the Janssen
Settlement Agreement and, if applicable, the Distributor Settlement Agreement. Further, private
counsel may only seek reimbursement for litigation fees and costs that have not previously been
reimbursed through prior settlements or judgments.
To effectuate a State Back-Stop Agreement pursuant to this section, an agreement in the form of
Appendix 3 may be entered into by a Plaintiff Subdivision, private counsel, and the California
Office of the Attorney General. The California Office of the Attorney General shall, upon the
request of a Plaintiff Subdivision, execute any agreement executed by a Plaintiff Subdivision and
its private counsel if it is in the form of Appendix 3. The California Office of the Attorney
6 E-6
General will also consider requests from Plaintiff Subdivisions to execute and enter into
agreements presented in other forms.
For the avoidance of doubt, this agreement does not require a Plaintiff Subdivision to request or
enter into a State Back-Stop Agreement, and no State Back-Stop Agreement shall impose any
duty or obligation on the State of California or any of its agencies or officers, including without
limitation the Attorney General.
5. State and Subdivision Reporting
a) DHCS will prepare an annual written report regarding the State’s use of funds from the
settlement until those funds are fully expended and for one year thereafter. These reports
will be made publicly available on the DHCS web site.
b) Each CA Participating Subdivision that receives payments of funds from the settlement
will prepare written reports at least annually regarding the use of those funds, until those
funds are fully expended and for one year thereafter. These reports will also include a
certification that all funds that the CA Participating Subdivision has received through the
settlement have been used in compliance with the Janssen Settlement Agreement and this
CA Janssen Allocation Agreement. The report will be in a form reasonably determined
by DHCS. Prior to specifying the form of the report DHCS will confer with
representatives of the Plaintiff Subdivisions.
c) The State and all CA Participating Subdivisions receiving CA Abatement Accounts
Funds will track all deposits and expenditures. Each such subdivision is responsible
solely for the CA Abatement Accounts Funds it receives. A county is not responsible for
oversight, reporting, or monitoring of CA Abatement Accounts Funds received by a city
within that county that receives direct payment. Unless otherwise exempt, Subdivisions’
expenditures and uses of CA Abatement Accounts Funds and other Settlement Funds will
be subject to the normal budgetary and expenditure process of the Subdivision.
d) Each Plaintiff Subdivision receiving CA Subdivision Funds will track all deposits and
expenditures, as required by the Janssen Settlement Agreement and this CA Janssen
Allocation Agreement. Among other things, Plaintiff Subdivisions using monies from
the CA Subdivision Fund for purposes that do not qualify as Opioid Remediation must
identify and include in their annual report, the amount and how such funds were used,
including if used to pay attorneys’ fees, investigation costs, or litigation costs. Pursuant
to Section VI(B)(2) of the Janssen Settlement Agreement, such information must also be
reported to the Settlement Fund Administrator and Janssen.
e) In each year in which DHCS prepares an annual report DHCS will also host a meeting to
discuss the annual report and the Opioid Remediation activities being carried out by the
State and Participating Subdivisions.
7 E-7
6. Miscellaneous
a) The State or any CA Participating Subdivision may bring a motion or action in the court
where the State has filed its Consent Judgment to enforce the requirements of this CA
Janssen Allocation Agreement. Before filing such a motion or action the State will meet
and confer with any CA Participating Subdivision that is the subject of the anticipated
motion or action, and vice versa.
b) Except as provided in the Janssen Settlement Agreement, this CA Janssen Allocation
Agreement is not enforceable by any party other than the State and the CA Participating
Subdivisions. It does not confer any rights or remedies upon, and shall not be
enforceable by, any third party.
c) Except as provided in the CA Janssen Allocation Agreement, if any provision of this
agreement or the application thereof to any person, entity, or circumstance shall, to any
extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement, or the application of
such provision to persons, entities, or circumstances other than those as to which it is
invalid or unenforceable, will not be affected thereby, and each other provision of this
agreement will be valid and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.
d) Except as provided in the Janssen Settlement Agreement, this agreement shall be
governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of California.
8 E-8
APPENDIX 1 DISCLAIMER: The allocation percentages herein are estimates only and should not be relied on for decisions regarding legal rights, releases, waivers, or other decisions affecting current or potential legal claims. Percentages shown in the Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage column may change pursuant to Section 4.C. of the California State-Subdivision Agreement Regarding Distribution and Use of Settlement Funds—Janssen Settlement, whereas the percentages shown in the Abatement Percentage column should not change. Participating Subdivisions, underlying calculations, and the calculated allocation percentages are subject to change. Regarding the column herein entitled “Abatement Percentage,” pursuant to Section 4.B.e., the State of California will receive the Local Allocation share of any payment to the Settlement Fund that is attributable to a county or city that is eligible to become a CA Participating Subdivision, but that has not, as of the date of that payment to the Settlement Fund, become a Participating Subdivision. Regarding the column herein entitled “Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage,” payments allocated to a Plaintiff Subdivision, which is not an Initial Participating Subdivision, will be re-allocated among the Plaintiff Subdivisions that are Initial Participating Subdivisions. Regarding the column herein entitled “Abatement Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the California Abatement Account Funds received, pursuant to Section 4.B. Regarding the column herein entitled “Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the California Subdivision Funds received, pursuant to Section 4.C. Regarding the column herein entitled “Weighted Allocation Percentage,” the annotation of “100%” refers to one-hundred percent (100%) of the combined and weighted allocation of the Abatement Percentage and the Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage. E-9
APPENDIX 1 100.000% 100.000% 100.000% Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage County Alameda County Alameda 2.332% 2.853% 2.4237952% City Alameda Alameda 0.069% 0.0570162% City Albany Alameda 0.013% 0.0107768% City Berkeley Alameda 0.152% 0.1249656% City Dublin Alameda 0.033% 0.040% 0.0338810% City Emeryville Alameda 0.023% 0.0185765% City Fremont Alameda 0.108% 0.0888576% City Hayward Alameda 0.117% 0.0966218% City Livermore Alameda 0.054% 0.0446740% City Newark Alameda 0.026% 0.0217626% City Oakland Alameda 0.486% 0.595% 0.5055601% City Piedmont Alameda 0.014% 0.0114064% City Pleasanton Alameda 0.067% 0.0554547% City San Leandro Alameda 0.039% 0.0321267% City Union City Alameda 0.043% 0.0352484% County Amador County Amador 0.226% 0.277% 0.2349885% County Butte County Butte 1.615% 1.975% 1.6783178% City Chico Butte 0.216% 0.264% 0.2246499% City Oroville Butte 0.079% 0.0646595% County Calaveras County Calaveras 0.226% 0.277% 0.2351644% County Colusa County Colusa 0.059% 0.0489221% County Contra Costa County Contra Costa 2.102% 2.571% 2.1844585% City Antioch Contra Costa 0.037% 0.0301879% City Brentwood Contra Costa 0.026% 0.0215339% City Clayton Contra Costa 0.002% 0.0018060% City Concord Contra Costa 0.055% 0.0456676% City Danville Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0082255% City El Cerrito Contra Costa 0.023% 0.0189024% City Hercules Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0078273% 1 of 15 E-10
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Lafayette Contra Costa 0.006% 0.0046030% City Martinez Contra Costa 0.012% 0.0098593% City Moraga Contra Costa 0.004% 0.0031007% City Oakley Contra Costa 0.010% 0.0079416% City Orinda Contra Costa 0.005% 0.0038157% City Pinole Contra Costa 0.013% 0.0110909% City Pittsburg Contra Costa 0.053% 0.0436369% City Pleasant Hill Contra Costa 0.013% 0.0106309% City Richmond Contra Costa 0.146% 0.1201444% City San Pablo Contra Costa 0.018% 0.0148843% City San Ramon Contra Costa 0.021% 0.0176459% City Walnut Creek Contra Costa 0.026% 0.0212132% County Del Norte County Del Norte 0.114% 0.140% 0.1189608% County El Dorado County El Dorado 0.768% 0.939% 0.7980034% City Placerville El Dorado 0.015% 0.0127642% City South Lake Tahoe El Dorado 0.081% 0.0665456% County Fresno County Fresno 1.895% 2.318% 1.9693410% City Clovis Fresno 0.065% 0.0536211% City Coalinga Fresno 0.012% 0.0098554% City Fresno Fresno 0.397% 0.3270605% City Kerman Fresno 0.005% 0.0042534% City Kingsburg Fresno 0.008% 0.0066167% City Mendota Fresno 0.002% 0.0019387% City Orange Cove Fresno 0.004% 0.0035607% City Parlier Fresno 0.008% 0.0069755% City Reedley Fresno 0.012% 0.0098804% City Sanger Fresno 0.018% 0.0146135% City Selma Fresno 0.015% 0.0127537% County Glenn County Glenn 0.107% 0.131% 0.1116978% County Humboldt County Humboldt 1.030% 1.260% 1.0703185% 2 of 15 E-11
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Arcata Humboldt 0.054% 0.0447660% City Eureka Humboldt 0.117% 0.143% 0.1216284% City Fortuna Humboldt 0.032% 0.0266837% County Imperial County Imperial 0.258% 0.315% 0.2679006% City Brawley Imperial 0.011% 0.0087986% City Calexico Imperial 0.019% 0.0152799% City El Centro Imperial 0.158% 0.1302522% City Imperial Imperial 0.006% 0.0048791% County Inyo County Inyo 0.073% 0.089% 0.0754413% County Kern County Kern 2.517% 3.079% 2.6159145% City Arvin Kern 0.006% 0.0046425% City Bakersfield Kern 0.212% 0.1747198% City California City Kern 0.009% 0.0070820% City Delano Kern 0.030% 0.0249316% City McFarland Kern 0.003% 0.0025644% City Ridgecrest Kern 0.015% 0.0120938% City Shafter Kern 0.013% 0.0103417% City Tehachapi Kern 0.009% 0.0073580% City Wasco Kern 0.008% 0.0069861% County Kings County Kings 0.293% 0.2413469% City Avenal Kings 0.007% 0.0056335% City Corcoran Kings 0.013% 0.0107032% City Hanford Kings 0.027% 0.0226038% City Lemoore Kings 0.016% 0.0131900% County Lake County Lake 0.795% 0.6545389% City Clearlake Lake 0.041% 0.050% 0.0426253% City Lakeport Lake 0.021% 0.026% 0.0222964% County Lassen County Lassen 0.319% 0.391% 0.3320610% City Susanville Lassen 0.027% 0.0219295% County Los Angeles County Los Angeles 13.896% 16.999% 14.4437559% 3 of 15 E-12
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Agoura Hills Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0040024% City Alhambra Los Angeles 0.042% 0.0343309% City Arcadia Los Angeles 0.033% 0.0267718% City Artesia Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0005100% City Azusa Los Angeles 0.026% 0.0210857% City Baldwin Park Los Angeles 0.027% 0.0218520% City Bell Los Angeles 0.008% 0.0068783% City Bellflower Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0014485% City Bell Gardens Los Angeles 0.014% 0.0114301% City Beverly Hills Los Angeles 0.065% 0.0534897% City Burbank Los Angeles 0.100% 0.0823132% City Calabasas Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0048948% City Carson Los Angeles 0.019% 0.0159805% City Cerritos Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039682% City Claremont Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0082584% City Commerce Los Angeles 0.000% 0.0002971% City Compton Los Angeles 0.044% 0.0361882% City Covina Los Angeles 0.028% 0.0229127% City Cudahy Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0006020% City Culver City Los Angeles 0.055% 0.0449894% City Diamond Bar Los Angeles 0.001% 0.0006993% City Downey Los Angeles 0.052% 0.0429994% City Duarte Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0027261% City El Monte Los Angeles 0.031% 0.038% 0.0318985% City El Segundo Los Angeles 0.033% 0.0268020% City Gardena Los Angeles 0.034% 0.0278088% City Glendale Los Angeles 0.166% 0.1366586% City Glendora Los Angeles 0.016% 0.0134411% City Hawaiian Gardens Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0040549% City Hawthorne Los Angeles 0.050% 0.0407833% 4 of 15 E-13
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Hermosa Beach Los Angeles 0.018% 0.0145307% City Huntington Park Los Angeles 0.023% 0.0190667% City Inglewood Los Angeles 0.059% 0.0489195% City La Cañada Flintridge Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0025565% City Lakewood Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039971% City La Mirada Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0081572% City Lancaster Los Angeles 0.045% 0.0369689% City La Puente Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0012999% City La Verne Los Angeles 0.024% 0.0194190% City Lawndale Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0017731% City Lomita Los Angeles 0.004% 0.0031940% City Long Beach Los Angeles 0.439% 0.3614151% City Los Angeles Los Angeles 2.715% 3.321% 2.8218811% City Lynwood Los Angeles 0.016% 0.0134345% City Malibu Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0019269% City Manhattan Beach Los Angeles 0.032% 0.0260686% City Maywood Los Angeles 0.004% 0.0035528% City Monrovia Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0254455% City Montebello Los Angeles 0.030% 0.0250670% City Monterey Park Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0256677% City Norwalk Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0258228% City Palmdale Los Angeles 0.046% 0.0375827% City Palos Verdes Estates Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0053102% City Paramount Los Angeles 0.011% 0.0091483% City Pasadena Los Angeles 0.146% 0.1200524% City Pico Rivera Los Angeles 0.022% 0.0183333% City Pomona Los Angeles 0.111% 0.0911933% City Rancho Palos Verdes Los Angeles 0.002% 0.0012645% City Redondo Beach Los Angeles 0.062% 0.0506992% City Rosemead Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0028260% 5 of 15 E-14
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City San Dimas Los Angeles 0.003% 0.0022016% City San Fernando Los Angeles 0.013% 0.0104837% City San Gabriel Los Angeles 0.018% 0.0147726% City San Marino Los Angeles 0.009% 0.0073791% City Santa Clarita Los Angeles 0.022% 0.0178167% City Santa Fe Springs Los Angeles 0.031% 0.0257531% City Santa Monica Los Angeles 0.158% 0.1298513% City Sierra Madre Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0048646% City Signal Hill Los Angeles 0.010% 0.0084884% City South El Monte Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039603% City South Gate Los Angeles 0.020% 0.0166272% City South Pasadena Los Angeles 0.012% 0.0095334% City Temple City Los Angeles 0.005% 0.0039498% City Torrance Los Angeles 0.112% 0.0919820% City Walnut Los Angeles 0.006% 0.0047305% City West Covina Los Angeles 0.049% 0.0404521% City West Hollywood Los Angeles 0.013% 0.0108517% City Whittier Los Angeles 0.032% 0.0260581% County Madera County Madera 0.349% 0.427% 0.3630669% City Chowchilla Madera 0.012% 0.0097332% City Madera Madera 0.039% 0.0318441% County Marin County Marin 0.564% 0.690% 0.5861325% City Larkspur Marin 0.015% 0.0124697% City Mill Valley Marin 0.020% 0.0168401% City Novato Marin 0.028% 0.0229824% City San Anselmo Marin 0.009% 0.0078062% City San Rafael Marin 0.089% 0.0729823% County Mariposa County Mariposa 0.084% 0.103% 0.0876131% County Mendocino County Mendocino 0.439% 0.536% 0.4558394% City Ukiah Mendocino 0.039% 0.0317153% 6 of 15 E-15
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage County Merced County Merced 0.551% 0.674% 0.5724262% City Atwater Merced 0.024% 0.0195846% City Livingston Merced 0.006% 0.0045873% City Los Banos Merced 0.020% 0.0165142% City Merced Merced 0.061% 0.0500762% County Modoc County Modoc 0.065% 0.080% 0.0678250% County Mono County Mono 0.023% 0.029% 0.0242606% County Monterey County Monterey 0.908% 1.111% 0.9437083% City Greenfield Monterey 0.006% 0.0050552% City King City Monterey 0.005% 0.0037355% City Marina Monterey 0.017% 0.0144098% City Monterey Monterey 0.041% 0.0336540% City Pacific Grove Monterey 0.009% 0.0074842% City Salinas Monterey 0.094% 0.0776576% City Seaside Monterey 0.023% 0.0191772% City Soledad Monterey 0.007% 0.0060870% County Napa County Napa 0.288% 0.352% 0.2994325% City American Canyon Napa 0.017% 0.0136869% City Napa Napa 0.078% 0.0642783% County Nevada County Nevada 0.441% 0.539% 0.4579827% City Grass Valley Nevada 0.024% 0.0197805% City Truckee Nevada 0.003% 0.0023843% County Orange County Orange 4.364% 5.339% 4.5363576% City Aliso Viejo Orange 0.014% 0.0113841% City Anaheim Orange 0.554% 0.678% 0.5759282% City Brea Orange 0.086% 0.0708897% City Buena Park Orange 0.087% 0.0714352% City Costa Mesa Orange 0.124% 0.152% 0.1288366% City Cypress Orange 0.033% 0.0271937% City Dana Point Orange 0.001% 0.0005560% 7 of 15 E-16
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Fountain Valley Orange 0.055% 0.0455980% City Fullerton Orange 0.137% 0.168% 0.1425744% City Garden Grove Orange 0.213% 0.1752482% City Huntington Beach Orange 0.247% 0.302% 0.2568420% City Irvine Orange 0.139% 0.170% 0.1442350% City Laguna Beach Orange 0.047% 0.058% 0.0493043% City Laguna Hills Orange 0.014% 0.0115457% City Laguna Niguel Orange 0.001% 0.0007071% City Laguna Woods Orange 0.001% 0.0006546% City La Habra Orange 0.060% 0.073% 0.0621049% City Lake Forest Orange 0.012% 0.0101249% City La Palma Orange 0.012% 0.0095439% City Los Alamitos Orange 0.008% 0.0069190% City Mission Viejo Orange 0.014% 0.0117560% City Newport Beach Orange 0.179% 0.1470134% City Orange Orange 0.150% 0.1231320% City Placentia Orange 0.029% 0.035% 0.0298912% City Rancho Santa Margarita Orange 0.001% 0.0006296% City San Clemente Orange 0.008% 0.010% 0.0086083% City San Juan Capistrano Orange 0.008% 0.0065510% City Santa Ana Orange 0.502% 0.614% 0.5213866% City Seal Beach Orange 0.020% 0.0165891% City Stanton Orange 0.035% 0.0291955% City Tustin Orange 0.073% 0.0600341% City Westminster Orange 0.104% 0.127% 0.1082721% City Yorba Linda Orange 0.044% 0.0362223% County Placer County Placer 1.045% 1.278% 1.0861002% City Auburn Placer 0.017% 0.0141114% City Lincoln Placer 0.031% 0.0255599% City Rocklin Placer 0.076% 0.0625485% 8 of 15 E-17
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Roseville Placer 0.196% 0.1616559% County Plumas County Plumas 0.205% 0.251% 0.2128729% County Riverside County Riverside 4.534% 5.547% 4.7128296% City Banning Riverside 0.017% 0.0143848% City Beaumont Riverside 0.021% 0.0171135% City Blythe Riverside 0.012% 0.0096714% City Canyon Lake Riverside 0.000% 0.0001761% City Cathedral City Riverside 0.067% 0.0553614% City Coachella Riverside 0.021% 0.0173054% City Corona Riverside 0.147% 0.1207083% City Desert Hot Springs Riverside 0.024% 0.0200433% City Eastvale Riverside 0.000% 0.0002747% City Hemet Riverside 0.051% 0.0421792% City Indio Riverside 0.056% 0.0457794% City Jurupa Valley Riverside 0.001% 0.0008991% City Lake Elsinore Riverside 0.021% 0.0172949% City La Quinta Riverside 0.063% 0.0516732% City Menifee Riverside 0.032% 0.0260909% City Moreno Valley Riverside 0.137% 0.1130348% City Murrieta Riverside 0.048% 0.059% 0.0497423% City Norco Riverside 0.016% 0.0134542% City Palm Desert Riverside 0.083% 0.0682465% City Palm Springs Riverside 0.076% 0.0629862% City Perris Riverside 0.009% 0.0076774% City Rancho Mirage Riverside 0.052% 0.0431098% City Riverside Riverside 0.268% 0.2206279% City San Jacinto Riverside 0.010% 0.0085936% City Temecula Riverside 0.022% 0.0180086% City Wildomar Riverside 0.008% 0.0062500% County Sacramento County Sacramento 3.797% 4.645% 3.9465887% 9 of 15 E-18
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Citrus Heights Sacramento 0.057% 0.0465312% City Elk Grove Sacramento 0.130% 0.1066994% City Folsom Sacramento 0.108% 0.0890850% City Galt Sacramento 0.017% 0.0143704% City Rancho Cordova Sacramento 0.008% 0.0067679% City Sacramento Sacramento 0.721% 0.882% 0.7496530% County San Benito County San Benito 0.106% 0.130% 0.1101417% City Hollister San Benito 0.027% 0.0225355% County San Bernardino County San Bernardino 3.259% 3.987% 3.3878124% City Adelanto San Bernardino 0.008% 0.0066640% City Apple Valley San Bernardino 0.025% 0.0207360% City Barstow San Bernardino 0.015% 0.0122056% City Chino San Bernardino 0.064% 0.0525893% City Chino Hills San Bernardino 0.001% 0.0006388% City Colton San Bernardino 0.031% 0.0253443% City Fontana San Bernardino 0.112% 0.0920543% City Grand Terrace San Bernardino 0.006% 0.0051051% City Hesperia San Bernardino 0.035% 0.0291522% City Highland San Bernardino 0.004% 0.0029061% City Loma Linda San Bernardino 0.009% 0.0071188% City Montclair San Bernardino 0.039% 0.0322108% City Ontario San Bernardino 0.179% 0.1472934% City Rancho Cucamonga San Bernardino 0.084% 0.0689431% City Redlands San Bernardino 0.057% 0.0469150% City Rialto San Bernardino 0.073% 0.0603206% City San Bernardino San Bernardino 0.178% 0.1461880% City Twentynine Palms San Bernardino 0.002% 0.0012605% City Upland San Bernardino 0.052% 0.0424460% City Victorville San Bernardino 0.033% 0.0269400% City Yucaipa San Bernardino 0.016% 0.0128772% 10 of 15 E-19
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Yucca Valley San Bernardino 0.003% 0.0021228% County San Diego County San Diego 5.706% 6.980% 5.9309748% City Carlsbad San Diego 0.128% 0.1050485% City Chula Vista San Diego 0.189% 0.231% 0.1961456% City Coronado San Diego 0.044% 0.0359095% City El Cajon San Diego 0.113% 0.0933582% City Encinitas San Diego 0.061% 0.074% 0.0630289% City Escondido San Diego 0.145% 0.1192204% City Imperial Beach San Diego 0.014% 0.0118283% City La Mesa San Diego 0.055% 0.068% 0.0575593% City Lemon Grove San Diego 0.022% 0.0183911% City National City San Diego 0.080% 0.0656808% City Oceanside San Diego 0.213% 0.1753428% City Poway San Diego 0.062% 0.0511040% City San Diego San Diego 1.975% 2.416% 2.0531169% City San Marcos San Diego 0.089% 0.0733897% City Santee San Diego 0.033% 0.0268401% City Solana Beach San Diego 0.017% 0.0138564% City Vista San Diego 0.052% 0.0425144% Consolidated San Francisco San Francisco 3.026% 3.702% 3.1457169% County San Joaquin County San Joaquin 1.680% 2.055% 1.7460399% City Lathrop San Joaquin 0.009% 0.0075394% City Lodi San Joaquin 0.053% 0.0439484% City Manteca San Joaquin 0.054% 0.0443454% City Ripon San Joaquin 0.013% 0.0104219% City Stockton San Joaquin 0.313% 0.383% 0.3256176% City Tracy San Joaquin 0.084% 0.0692047% County San Luis Obispo County San Luis Obispo 0.816% 0.999% 0.8484126% City Arroyo Grande San Luis Obispo 0.024% 0.0199053% City Atascadero San Luis Obispo 0.029% 0.0240680% 11 of 15 E-20
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City El Paso de Robles (Paso Robles) San Luis Obispo 0.043% 0.0353456% City Grover Beach San Luis Obispo 0.017% 0.0137881% City Morro Bay San Luis Obispo 0.020% 0.0160922% City San Luis Obispo San Luis Obispo 0.077% 0.0637841% County San Mateo County San Mateo 1.074% 1.313% 1.1159599% City Belmont San Mateo 0.021% 0.0169860% City Burlingame San Mateo 0.019% 0.0152537% City Daly City San Mateo 0.044% 0.0363880% City East Palo Alto San Mateo 0.013% 0.0103982% City Foster City San Mateo 0.020% 0.0166101% City Half Moon Bay San Mateo 0.004% 0.0031638% City Hillsborough San Mateo 0.013% 0.0110029% City Menlo Park San Mateo 0.015% 0.0126209% City Millbrae San Mateo 0.013% 0.0105836% City Pacifica San Mateo 0.016% 0.0130625% City Redwood City San Mateo 0.056% 0.0463511% City San Bruno San Mateo 0.021% 0.0172161% City San Carlos San Mateo 0.013% 0.0108885% City San Mateo San Mateo 0.052% 0.0425841% City South San Francisco San Mateo 0.043% 0.0353943% County Santa Barbara County Santa Barbara 1.132% 1.385% 1.1768968% City Carpinteria Santa Barbara 0.001% 0.0008938% City Goleta Santa Barbara 0.004% 0.0028969% City Lompoc Santa Barbara 0.047% 0.0389379% City Santa Barbara Santa Barbara 0.122% 0.1004559% City Santa Maria Santa Barbara 0.058% 0.0479179% County Santa Clara County Santa Clara 2.404% 2.941% 2.4987553% City Campbell Santa Clara 0.014% 0.0112566% City Cupertino Santa Clara 0.008% 0.0066824% City Gilroy Santa Clara 0.025% 0.0202891% 12 of 15 E-21
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Los Altos Santa Clara 0.013% 0.0103338% City Los Gatos Santa Clara 0.013% 0.0103220% City Milpitas Santa Clara 0.036% 0.0298120% City Morgan Hill Santa Clara 0.015% 0.0124619% City Mountain View Santa Clara 0.041% 0.0334608% City Palo Alto Santa Clara 0.039% 0.0323080% City San Jose Santa Clara 0.294% 0.360% 0.3054960% City Santa Clara Santa Clara 0.067% 0.0549723% City Saratoga Santa Clara 0.004% 0.0034161% City Sunnyvale Santa Clara 0.053% 0.0434069% County Santa Cruz County Santa Cruz 0.783% 0.957% 0.8135396% City Capitola Santa Cruz 0.020% 0.0168191% City Santa Cruz Santa Cruz 0.143% 0.1180348% City Scotts Valley Santa Cruz 0.015% 0.0126525% City Watsonville Santa Cruz 0.063% 0.0520136% County Shasta County Shasta 1.095% 1.339% 1.1380191% City Anderson Shasta 0.024% 0.0198896% City Redding Shasta 0.284% 0.2334841% City Shasta Lake Shasta 0.004% 0.0031993% County Siskiyou County Siskiyou 0.228% 0.279% 0.2373393% County Solano County Solano 0.760% 0.6260795% City Benicia Solano 0.031% 0.0253903% City Dixon Solano 0.016% 0.0130849% City Fairfield Solano 0.109% 0.0897317% City Suisun City Solano 0.021% 0.0176183% City Vacaville Solano 0.119% 0.0976497% City Vallejo Solano 0.167% 0.1373644% County Sonoma County Sonoma 1.218% 1.490% 1.2661290% City Healdsburg Sonoma 0.032% 0.0266929% City Petaluma Sonoma 0.081% 0.0667507% 13 of 15 E-22
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Rohnert Park Sonoma 0.041% 0.0340759% City Santa Rosa Sonoma 0.184% 0.1519070% City Sonoma Sonoma 0.022% 0.0183438% City Windsor Sonoma 0.016% 0.0129298% County Stanislaus County Stanislaus 1.722% 1.4182273% City Ceres Stanislaus 0.041% 0.0340260% City Modesto Stanislaus 0.217% 0.1788759% City Newman Stanislaus 0.006% 0.0046964% City Oakdale Stanislaus 0.018% 0.0145531% City Patterson Stanislaus 0.015% 0.0126590% City Riverbank Stanislaus 0.010% 0.0085699% City Turlock Stanislaus 0.065% 0.0531966% County Sutter County Sutter 0.306% 0.374% 0.3179548% City Yuba City Sutter 0.074% 0.0606242% County Tehama County Tehama 0.213% 0.261% 0.2216654% City Red Bluff Tehama 0.014% 0.0117771% County Trinity County Trinity 0.082% 0.101% 0.0855476% County Tulare County Tulare 0.809% 0.990% 0.8410949% City Dinuba Tulare 0.014% 0.0116929% City Exeter Tulare 0.004% 0.0032479% City Farmersville Tulare 0.003% 0.0027879% City Lindsay Tulare 0.007% 0.0057111% City Porterville Tulare 0.021% 0.0171845% City Tulare Tulare 0.037% 0.0302273% City Visalia Tulare 0.066% 0.0545872% County Tuolumne County Tuolumne 0.486% 0.594% 0.5047621% County Ventura County Ventura 2.192% 2.681% 2.2781201% City Camarillo Ventura 0.002% 0.0012815% City Fillmore Ventura 0.002% 0.0020294% City Moorpark Ventura 0.008% 0.0067337% 14 of 15 E-23
APPENDIX 1 Participating Subdivision Classification Participating Subdivision County Abatement Percentage Plaintiff Subdivision Percentage Weighted Allcation Percentage City Oxnard Ventura 0.156% 0.190% 0.1617338% City Port Hueneme Ventura 0.021% 0.0174145% City San Buenaventura (Ventura) Ventura 0.085% 0.0702181% City Santa Paula Ventura 0.014% 0.0119072% City Simi Valley Ventura 0.065% 0.0533043% City Thousand Oaks Ventura 0.022% 0.0179902% County Yolo County Yolo 0.357% 0.437% 0.3713319% City Davis Yolo 0.055% 0.0451747% City West Sacramento Yolo 0.066% 0.0544321% City Woodland Yolo 0.058% 0.0477904% County Yuba County Yuba 0.214% 0.262% 0.2225679% City Marysville Yuba 0.014% 0.0112079% 15 of 15 E-24
APPENDIX 2
Cost Reimbursement Procedure
1. Additional defined terms:
a) Costs means the reasonable amounts paid for the attorney and other City Attorney and
County Counsel staff time for individuals employed by a Plaintiff Subdivision at the
contractual rate, inclusive of benefits and overhead, together with amounts paid for court
reporters, experts, copying, electronic research, travel, vendors, and the like, which were
paid or incurred (i) prior to July 21, 2021 in litigation against any Opioid Defendant
and/or (ii) in negotiating and drafting this CA Janssen Allocation Agreement. Costs does
not include attorneys’ fees, costs, or expenses incurred by private contingency fee
counsel. No part of the CA Abatement Accounts Fund will be used to reimburse Costs.
b) First Claims Date means October 1, 2023 or when all applications for reimbursement of
Costs, in whole or in part, from funds available under Section X and Exhibit R of the
Distributor Settlement Agreement or Section XI and Exhibit R of the Janssen Settlement
Agreement, have been finally determined under the provisions of those agreements,
whichever comes first.
c) Special Master means a retired judicial officer or former public lawyer, not presently
employed or retained by a Plaintiff Subdivision, who will aggregate, review, and
determine the reasonable Costs to be awarded to each Plaintiff Subdivision that submits a
claim for reimbursement of Costs. The Special Master will be selected by a majority vote
of the votes cast by Plaintiff Subdivisions, with each such subdivision having one vote.
d) Plaintiff Subdivision Committee means the committee of Plaintiff Subdivisions that will
review and approve the invoices submitted by the Special Master reflecting his or her
reasonable time and expenses.
2. Cost Reimbursement to Plaintiff Subdivision
a) Purpose. Substantial resources have been expended to hold Opioid Defendants
accountable for creating and profiting from the opioid crisis, and this effort has been a
significant catalyst in creating a National Opioid Settlement with Distributors, Johnson &
Johnson, and others.
b) Claims Procedure.
i. If a Plaintiff Subdivision is eligible to seek reimbursement of Costs, in whole or in
part, from funds available under Section X or Exhibit R of the Distributor
Settlement Agreement or Section XI or Exhibit R of the Janssen Settlement
Agreement, it must first make a timely application for reimbursement from such
funds. To allow sufficient time for determination of those applications, no claim for
1 E-25
Costs to the CA Subdivision Fund under this Agreement may be made before the
First Claims Date.
ii. A Plaintiff Subdivision that wishes to be reimbursed from the CA Subdivision Fund
must submit a claim to the Special Master no later than forty-five (45) days after the
First Claims Date. The Special Master will then compile and redistribute the
aggregated claim totals for each Plaintiff Subdivision via email to representatives of
all the Plaintiff Subdivisions. A claim for attorney and staff time must list, for each
attorney or staff member included in the claim, the following information: name,
title, total hours claimed, hourly rate (including, if sought, benefits and share of
overhead), and narrative summarizing the general nature of the work performed by
the attorney or staff member. For reimbursement of “hard” costs, the subdivision
may aggregate across a category (e.g., total for travel costs). It is the intention of the
Plaintiff Subdivisions that submission of documents related to reimbursement of
Costs does not waive any attorney-client privilege or exemptions to the California
Public Records Act.
iii. The Special Master may request, at his or her sole option, additional documents or
details to assist in the final award of Costs.
iv. The Special Master will review claims for reasonableness and will notify each
Plaintiff Subdivision of the final determination of its claim, and will provide a list of
all final awards to all Plaintiff Subdivisions by email or, upon request, via First
Class U.S. Mail. Any Plaintiff Subdivision may ask the Special Master to reconsider
any final award within twenty-one (21) days. The Special Master will make a final
determination on any such reconsideration request within thirty (30) days of receipt.
v. Any decision of the Special Master is final and binding, and will be considered
under the California Arbitration Act, Code of Civil Procedure section 1280 et seq.
as a final arbitration award. Nothing in this agreement is intended to expand the
scope of judicial review of the final award for errors of fact or law, and the Parties
agree that they may only seek to vacate the award if clear and convincing evidence
demonstrates one of the factors set forth in Code of Civil Procedure, section 1286.2,
subdivision (a). Plaintiff Subdivisions will have fourteen (14) days after all final
awards are made, together with any final determination of a request for
reconsideration, to seek review in the Superior Court of California, pursuant to Code
of Civil Procedure, section 1285, where the State has filed its Consent Judgment.
vi. The Special Master will prepare a report of Costs that includes his or her fees and
expenses at least ninety (90) days before the Payment Date for each Annual
Payment. The Special Master’s preparation of a report of Costs does not discharge a
Plaintiff Subdivision’s reporting requirement under Section VI.B.2 of the Janssen
Agreement.
vii. A member of the Plaintiff Subdivision Committee, which is a CA Participating
Subdivision, will submit to the Settlement Fund Administrator and Janssen a report
2 E-26
of the fees and expenses incurred by the Special Master pursuant to Section VI.B.2
of the Janssen Agreement.
c) Claims Priority and Limitation.
i. The Special Master will submit invoices for compensation of reasonable fees and
expenses to the Plaintiff Subdivision Committee no later than ninety (90) days prior
to the Payment Date for each Annual Payment. The Plaintiff Subdivision Committee
will promptly review and, if reasonable, approve the Special Master’s invoice for
compensation. The Plaintiff Subdivision Committee will submit approved invoices
to the Settlement Fund Administrator for payment. The Special Master’s approved
invoices have priority and will be paid first from the CA Subdivision Fund before
any award of Costs, subject to the limitation in Section 2.c.v below.
ii. Final Awards of Costs that do not exceed seventy-five thousand dollars
($75,000.00) will be paid next in priority after the Special Master’s approved
invoices.
iii. Final Awards of Costs in excess of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000.00) will
be paid proportionally from the funds remaining in that year’s Annual Payment.
iv. Any claim for Costs that is not paid in full will be allocated against the next year’s
distribution from the CA Subdivision Fund, until all approved claims for Costs are
paid in full.
v. In no event will more than 50% of the total CA Subdivision Fund received in any
year be used to pay Costs or the Special Master’s approved invoices.
vi. In no event shall more than $28 million of the total CA Subdivision Funds paid
pursuant to the Distributor Settlement Agreement and the Janssen Settlement
Agreement be used to pay Costs.
d) Collateral Source Payments and Third-Party Settlement.
i. In the event a Plaintiff Subdivision is awarded compensation, in whole or in part, by
any source of funds created as a result of litigation against an Opioid Defendant for
its reasonable Costs, it will reduce its claim for Costs from the CA Subdivision
Fund by that amount. If a Plaintiff Subdivision has already received a final award of
Costs from the CA Subdivision Fund, it will repay the fund up to the prior award of
Costs via a payment to the Settlement Fund Administrator or notify the Settlement
Fund Administrator that its allocation from the next and subsequent Annual
Payments should be reduced accordingly. If the Plaintiff Subdivision is repaying
any prior award of Costs, that repayment will occur as soon as is feasible after the
Plaintiff Subdivision’s receipt of Cost funds from the collateral source, but no more
than 90 days after its receipt from the collateral source. The Settlement Fund
Administrator will add any repaid Costs to the CA Subdivision Fund.
3 E-27
ii. In the event a Plaintiff Subdivision reaches a monetary settlement or compromise
against any Opioid Defendant outside of the National Opioid Settlement, the
monetary portion of such settlement, net of fees paid to outside contingency fee
counsel and of funds earmarked strictly for abatement, will be credited against its
Costs and the subdivision will be ineligible to recover those credited Costs from the
CA Subdivision Fund. Plaintiff Subdivisions negotiating monetary settlements or
compromises against any Opioid Defendant outside of the National Opioid
Settlement will negotiate for funds to repay any Costs it previously received from
the CA Subdivision Fund or for Costs it otherwise might be eligible to claim from
the CA Subdivision Fund. If such a settlement is paid after all final approved claims
for Costs by all Plaintiff Subdivisions are satisfied in full, the settling subdivision
will reimburse the CA Subdivision Fund in that amount by making payment to the
Settlement Fund Administrator to add to the CA Subdivision Fund in a manner
consistent with the repayments described in section 2.d.i above.
4 E-28
APPENDIX 3
CALIFORNIA-SUBDIVISION BACKSTOP AGREEMENT
On August 6, 2021, Judge Polster of the US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
issued an Order (the Order), docket number 3814, in In Re National Prescription Opiate
Litigation, MDL 2804, addressing contingent attorney fee contracts between political
subdivisions eligible to participate in the Janssen Settlement and their counsel.
In light of the Order, and at the request of [SUBDIVISION], the [SUBDIVISION], its counsel
[COUNSEL], and the California Attorney General, on behalf of the State of California, are
entering into this California-Subdivision Backstop Agreement (Backstop Agreement).
[SUBDIVISION] and [COUNSEL] intend this Backstop Agreement to constitute a State Back-
Stop Agreement as that term is used in the Order and in Exhibit R (Agreement on Attorneys’
Fees, Costs, and Expenses) of the Janssen Settlement Agreement.
Pursuant to this Backstop Agreement, [SUBDIVISION] may, subject to the limitations of the
Janssen Settlement Agreement and CA Janssen Allocation Agreement, as well as any other
limitations imposed by law, use funds that it receives from the Janssen Settlement CA
Subdivision Fund to pay a contingent fee to [COUNSEL]. Any such payment from
[SUBDIVISION] to [COUNSEL], together with any contingency fees that [COUNSEL] may
receive from the national Attorney Fee Fund, will not exceed a total contingency fee of
[PERCENTAGE NOT TO EXCEED 15%] of the total gross recovery of [SUBDIVISION] from
the Distributors Settlement.
[COUNSEL] certify that they first sought fees and costs from the Attorney Fee Fund created
under the Janssen Settlement Agreement before seeking or accepting payment under this
backstop agreement. [COUNSEL] further certify that they are not seeking and will not accept
payment under this backstop agreement of any litigation fees or costs that have been reimbursed
through prior settlements or judgments.
The Attorney General is executing this agreement solely because the definition of “State Back-
Stop Agreement” in Exhibit R of the Janssen Settlement Agreement requires such agreements to
be between “a Settling State” and private counsel for a participating subdivision. Neither the
California Attorney General nor the State of California have any obligations under this Backstop
Agreement, and this Backstop Agreement does not require the payment of any state funds to
[SUBDIVISION], [COUNSEL], or any other party.
[DATE] [SUBDIVISION SIGNATURE BLOCK]
[DATE] [COUNSEL SIGNATURE BLOCK]
[DATE] [ATTORNEY GENERAL SIGNATURE BLOCK]
1 E-29
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
44
the next Payment Date that is at least one hundred eighty (180) calendar days after the
Revocation Event, unless the Bar is reinstated or all Subdivisions affected by the
Revocation Event become Participating Subdivisions within one hundred eighty (180)
calendar days of the Revocation Event, the Participation Tier shall decrease – solely for
the State in which the Revocation Event occurred – to the Participation Tier
commensurate with the percentage of Litigating Subdivisions in that State that are
Participating Subdivisions and the percentage of Non-Litigating Subdivisions that are
both Primary Subdivisions and Participating Subdivisions, according to the criteria set
forth in Exhibit G, except that the calculations shall be performed as to that State alone.
For the avoidance of doubt and solely for the calculation in this subparagraph, the
Settling States Column of Exhibit H shall play no role. This is the sole circumstance in
which one Settling State will have a different Participation Tier than other Settling States.
6. The redetermination of the Participation Tier under Section VIII.C.2 shall
not affect payments already made or suspensions, offsets, or reductions already applied.
IX. Additional Restitution
A.Additional Restitution Amount. Pursuant to the schedule set forth in Exhibit M
and subject to the reduction specified in Section IX.B, the Settling Distributors shall pay an
Additional Restitution Amount to the Settling States listed in Exhibit N. Such funds shall be
paid, on the schedule set forth on Exhibit M, on the Payment Date for each relevant Payment
Year to such Settling States as allocated by the Settlement Fund Administrator pursuant to
Exhibit N.
B.Reduction of Additional Restitution Amount. In the event that any Non-Settling
States appear on Exhibit N, the amounts owed by Settling Distributors pursuant to this
Section IX shall be reduced by the allocations set forth on Exhibit N for any such Non-Settling
States.
C.Use of Funds. All funds paid as an Additional Restitution Amount shall be part of
the Compensatory Restitution Amount, shall be used for Opioid Remediation, except as allowed
by Section V.B.2, and shall be governed by the same requirements as specified in Section V.F.
X. Plaintiffs’ Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
The Agreement on Attorneys’ Fees, Expenses and Costs is set forth in Exhibit R and
incorporated herein by reference. The Agreement on the State Outside Counsel Fee Fund and
Agreement on the State Cost Fund Administration are set forth in Exhibit S and Exhibit T,
respectively, and are incorporated herein by reference.
XI. Release
A.Scope. As of the Effective Date, the Released Entities are hereby released and
forever discharged from all of the Releasors’ Released Claims. Each Settling State (for itself and
its Releasors) and Participating Subdivision hereby absolutely, unconditionally, and irrevocably
covenants not to bring, file, or claim, or to cause, assist or permit to be brought, filed, or claimed,
or to otherwise seek to establish liability for any Released Claims against any Released Entity in
F-1
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
45
any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for in this Agreement are intended by the Parties
to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities the broadest possible bar
against any liability relating in any way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the
power of each Settling State and its Attorney General to release claims. This Agreement shall be
a complete bar to any Released Claim.
B.Claim-Over and Non-Party Settlement.
1. It is the intent of the Parties that:
a. Released Entities should not seek contribution or indemnification
(other than pursuant to an insurance contract), from other parties for their
payment obligations under this Agreement;
b. the payments made under this Agreement shall be the sole
payments made by the Released Entities to the Releasors involving, arising out
of, or related to Covered Conduct (or conduct that would be Covered Conduct if
engaged in by a Released Entity);
c. Claims by Releasors against non-Parties should not result in
additional payments by Released Entities, whether through contribution,
indemnification or any other means; and
d. the Agreement meets the requirements of the Uniform
Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act and any similar state law or doctrine
that reduces or discharges a released party’s liability to any other parties.
The provisions of this Section XI.B are intended to be implemented consistent with these
principles. This Agreement and the releases and dismissals provided for herein are made in good
faith.
2. No Released Entity shall seek to recover for amounts paid under this
Agreement based on indemnification, contribution, or any other theory from a
manufacturer, pharmacy, hospital, pharmacy benefit manager, health insurer, third-party
vendor, trade association, distributor, or health care practitioner; provided that a Released
Entity shall be relieved of this prohibition with respect to any entity that asserts a Claim-
Over against it. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall prohibit a Released
Entity from recovering amounts owed pursuant to insurance contracts.
3. To the extent that, on or after the Reference Date, any Releasor enters
into a Non-Party Settlement, including in any bankruptcy case or through any plan of
reorganization (whether individually or as a class of creditors), the Releasor will include
(or in the case of a Non-Party Settlement made in connection with a bankruptcy case, will
cause the debtor to include), unless prohibited from doing so under applicable law, in the
Non-Party Settlement a prohibition on contribution or indemnity of any kind substantially
equivalent to that required from the Settling Distributors in Section XI.B.2, or a release
from such Non-Released Entity in favor of the Released Entities (in a form equivalent to
the releases contained in this Agreement) of any Claim-Over. The obligation to obtain
F-2
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
46
the prohibition and/or release required by this subsection is a material term of this
Agreement.
4. In the event that any Releasor obtains a judgment with respect to Non-
Party Covered Conduct against a Non-Released Entity that does not contain a prohibition
like that described in Section XI.B.3, or any Releasor files a Non-Party Covered Conduct
Claim against a Non-Released Entity in bankruptcy or a Releasor is prevented for any
reason from obtaining a prohibition/release in a Non-Party Settlement as provided in
Section XI.B.3, and such Non-Released Entity asserts a Claim-Over against a Released
Entity, the Released Entity shall be relieved of the prohibition in Section XI.B.2 with
respect to that Non-Released Entity and that Releasor and the Settling Distributors shall
take the following actions to ensure that the Released Entities do not pay more with
respect to Covered Conduct to Releasors or to Non-Released Entities than the amounts
owed under this Settlement Agreement by the Settling Distributors:
a. Settling Distributors shall notify that Releasor of the Claim-Over
within sixty (60) calendar days of the assertion of the Claim-Over or sixty (60)
calendar days of the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, whichever is
later;
b. Settling Distributors and that Releasor shall meet and confer
concerning the means to hold Released Entities harmless and ensure that they
are not required to pay more with respect to Covered Conduct than the amounts
owed by Settling Distributors under this Agreement;
c. That Releasor and Settling Distributors shall take steps sufficient
and permissible under the law of the State of the Releasor to hold Released
Entities harmless from the Claim-Over and ensure Released Entities are not
required to pay more with respect to Covered Conduct than the amounts owed
by Settling Distributors under this Agreement. Such steps may include, where
permissible:
(i) Filing of motions to dismiss or such other appropriate
motion by Settling Distributors or Released Entities, and supported by
Releasors, in response to any claim filed in litigation or arbitration;
(ii) Reduction of that Releasors’ Claim and any judgment it
has obtained or may obtain against such Non-Released Entity by
whatever amount or percentage is necessary to extinguish such Claim-
Over under applicable law, up to the amount that Releasor has obtained,
may obtain, or has authority to control from such Non-Released Entity;
(iii) Placement into escrow of funds paid by the Non-Released
Entities such that those funds are available to satisfy the Claim-Over;
(iv) Return of monies paid by Settling Distributors to that
Releasor under this Settlement Agreement to permit satisfaction of a
F-3
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
47
judgment against or settlement with the Non-Released Entity to satisfy
the Claim-Over;
(v) Payment of monies to Settling Distributors by that
Releasor to ensure they are held harmless from such Claim-Over, up to
the amount that Releasor has obtained, may obtain, or has authority to
control from such Non-Released Entity;
(vi) Credit to the Settling Distributors under this Agreement to
reduce the overall amounts to be paid under the Agreement such that
they are held harmless from the Claim-Over; and
(vii) Such other actions as that Releasor and Settling
Distributors may devise to hold Settling Distributors harmless from the
Claim-Over.
d. The actions of that Releasor and Settling Distributors taken
pursuant to paragraph (c) must, in combination, ensure Settling Distributors are
not required to pay more with respect to Covered Conduct than the amounts
owed by Settling Distributors under this Agreement.
e. In the event of any dispute over the sufficiency of the actions
taken pursuant to paragraph (c), that Releasor and the Settling Distributors may
seek review by the National Arbitration Panel, provided that, if the parties agree,
such dispute may be heard by the state court where the relevant Consent
Judgment was filed. The National Arbitration Panel shall have authority to
require Releasors to implement a remedy that includes one or more of the
actions specified in paragraph (c) sufficient to hold Released Entities fully
harmless. In the event that the Panel’s actions do not result in Released Entities
being held fully harmless, Settling Distributors shall have a claim for breach of
this Agreement by Releasors, with the remedy being payment of sufficient funds
to hold Settling Distributors harmless from the Claim-Over. For the avoidance
of doubt, the prior sentence does not limit or eliminate any other remedy that
Settling Distributors may have.
5. To the extent that the Claim-Over is based on a contractual indemnity,
the obligations under Section XI.B.4 shall extend solely to a Non-Party Covered Conduct
Claim against a pharmacy, clinic, hospital or other purchaser or dispenser of Products, a
manufacturer that sold Products, a consultant, and/or a pharmacy benefit manager or
other third-party payor. Each Settling Distributor shall notify the Settling States, to the
extent permitted by applicable law, in the event that any of these types of Non-Released
Entity asserts a Claim-Over arising out of contractual indemnity against it.
C.Indemnification and Contribution Prohibited. No Released Entity shall seek to
recover for amounts paid under this Agreement based on indemnification, contribution, or any
other theory, from a manufacturer, pharmacy, hospital, pharmacy benefit manager, health
insurer, third-party vendor, trade association, distributor, or health care practitioner. For the
F-4
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
48
avoidance of doubt, nothing herein shall prohibit a Released Entity from recovering amounts
owed pursuant to insurance contracts.
D.General Release. In connection with the releases provided for in this Agreement,
each Settling State (for itself and its Releasors) and Participating Subdivision expressly waives,
releases, and forever discharges any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred by any law
of any State or territory of the United States or other jurisdiction, or principle of common law,
which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to § 1542 of the California Civil Code, which reads:
General Release; extent. A general release does not extend to
claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect
to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and
that if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or
her settlement with the debtor or released party.
A Releasor may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those which it knows,
believes, or assumes to be true with respect to the Released Claims, but each Settling State (for
itself and its Releasors) and Participating Subdivision hereby expressly waives and fully, finally,
and forever settles, releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Released
Claims that may exist as of such date but which Releasors do not know or suspect to exist,
whether through ignorance, oversight, error, negligence or through no fault whatsoever, and
which, if known, would materially affect the Settling States’ decision to enter into this
Agreement or the Participating Subdivisions’ decision to participate in this Agreement.
E.Assigned Interest Waiver. To the extent that any Settling State has any direct or
indirect interest in any rights of a third-party that is a debtor under the Bankruptcy Code as a
result of a claim arising out of Covered Conduct by way of assignment or otherwise, including as
a result of being the beneficiary of a trust or other distribution entity, to assert claims against a
Settling Distributor (whether derivatively or otherwise), under any legal or equitable theory,
including for indemnification, contribution, or subrogation, such Settling State waives the right
to assert any such claim, or to receive a distribution or any benefit on account of such claim and
such claim, distribution, or benefit shall be deemed assigned to such Settling Distributor.
F.Res Judicata. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to reduce the scope of
the res judicata or claim preclusive effect that the settlement memorialized in this Agreement,
and/or any Consent Judgment or other judgment entered on this Agreement, gives rise to under
applicable law.
G.Representation and Warranty. The signatories hereto on behalf of their respective
Settling States expressly represent and warrant that they have (or have obtained, or will obtain no
later than the Initial Participation Date) the authority to settle and release, to the maximum extent
of the State’s power, all Released Claims of (1) their respective Settling States, (2) all past and
present executive departments, state agencies, divisions, boards, commissions and
instrumentalities with the regulatory authority to enforce state and federal controlled substances
acts, and (3) any of their respective Settling State’s past and present executive departments,
agencies, divisions, boards, commissions and instrumentalities that have the authority to bring
Claims related to Covered Conduct seeking money (including abatement and/or remediation) or
F-5
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-1
EXHIBIT E
List of Opioid Remediation Uses
Schedule A
Core Strategies
States and Qualifying Block Grantees shall choose from among the abatement strategies listed in
Schedule B. However, priority shall be given to the following core abatement strategies (“Core
Strategies”).14
A.NALOXONE OR OTHER FDA-APPROVED DRUG TO
REVERSE OPIOID OVERDOSES
1.Expand training for first responders, schools, community
support groups and families; and
2.Increase distribution to individuals who are uninsured or
whose insurance does not cover the needed service.
B.MEDICATION-ASSISTED TREATMENT (“MAT”)
DISTRIBUTION AND OTHER OPIOID-RELATED
TREATMENT
1.Increase distribution of MAT to individuals who are
uninsured or whose insurance does not cover the needed
service;
2.Provide education to school-based and youth-focused
programs that discourage or prevent misuse;
3.Provide MAT education and awareness training to
healthcare providers, EMTs, law enforcement, and other
first responders; and
4.Provide treatment and recovery support services such as
residential and inpatient treatment, intensive outpatient
treatment, outpatient therapy or counseling, and recovery
housing that allow or integrate medication and with other
support services.
14 As used in this Schedule A, words like “expand,” “fund,” “provide” or the like shall not indicate a preference for
new or existing programs.
G-1
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-2
C.PREGNANT & POSTPARTUM WOMEN
1.Expand Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to
Treatment (“SBIRT”) services to non-Medicaid eligible or
uninsured pregnant women;
2.Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and
recovery services, including MAT, for women with co-
occurring Opioid Use Disorder (“OUD”) and other
Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”)/Mental Health disorders
for uninsured individuals for up to 12 months postpartum;
and
3.Provide comprehensive wrap-around services to individuals
with OUD, including housing, transportation, job
placement/training, and childcare.
D.EXPANDING TREATMENT FOR NEONATAL
ABSTINENCE SYNDROME (“NAS”)
1.Expand comprehensive evidence-based and recovery
support for NAS babies;
2.Expand services for better continuum of care with infant-
need dyad; and
3.Expand long-term treatment and services for medical
monitoring of NAS babies and their families.
E.EXPANSION OF WARM HAND-OFF PROGRAMS AND
RECOVERY SERVICES
1.Expand services such as navigators and on-call teams to
begin MAT in hospital emergency departments;
2.Expand warm hand-off services to transition to recovery
services;
3.Broaden scope of recovery services to include co-occurring
SUD or mental health conditions;
4.Provide comprehensive wrap-around services to individuals
in recovery, including housing, transportation, job
placement/training, and childcare; and
5.Hire additional social workers or other behavioral health
workers to facilitate expansions above.
G-2
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-3
F.TREATMENT FOR INCARCERATED POPULATION
1.Provide evidence-based treatment and recovery support,
including MAT for persons with OUD and co-occurring
SUD/MH disorders within and transitioning out of the
criminal justice system; and
2.Increase funding for jails to provide treatment to inmates
with OUD.
G.PREVENTION PROGRAMS
1.Funding for media campaigns to prevent opioid use (similar
to the FDA’s “Real Cost” campaign to prevent youth from
misusing tobacco);
2.Funding for evidence-based prevention programs in
schools;
3.Funding for medical provider education and outreach
regarding best prescribing practices for opioids consistent
with the 2016 CDC guidelines, including providers at
hospitals (academic detailing);
4.Funding for community drug disposal programs; and
5.Funding and training for first responders to participate in
pre-arrest diversion programs, post-overdose response
teams, or similar strategies that connect at-risk individuals
to behavioral health services and supports.
H.EXPANDING SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAMS
1.Provide comprehensive syringe services programs with
more wrap-around services, including linkage to OUD
treatment, access to sterile syringes and linkage to care and
treatment of infectious diseases.
I.EVIDENCE-BASED DATA COLLECTION AND
RESEARCH ANALYZING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
ABATEMENT STRATEGIES WITHIN THE STATE
G-3
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-4
Schedule B
Approved Uses
Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and any co-occurring Substance Use Disorder
or Mental Health (SUD/MH) conditions through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs
or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following:
PART ONE: TREATMENT
A.TREAT OPIOID USE DISORDER (OUD)
Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (“OUD”) and any co-occurring Substance Use
Disorder or Mental Health (“SUD/MH”) conditions through evidence-based or evidence-
informed programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, those that:15
1.Expand availability of treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH
conditions, including all forms of Medication-Assisted Treatment (“MAT”)
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-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, including MAT, as well as counseling, psychiatric support,
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 low
threshold approaches to treatment.
5.Support mobile intervention, treatment, and recovery services, offered by
qualified 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, sexual
assault, human trafficking, or adverse childhood experiences) and family
members (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 evidence-based withdrawal management services for people with OUD
and any co-occurring mental health conditions.
15 As used in this Schedule B, words like “expand,” “fund,” “provide” or the like shall not indicate a preference for
new or existing programs.
G-4
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-5
8.Provide training on MAT 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 providers
in rural or underserved areas.
9.Support workforce development for addiction professionals who work with
persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
10.Offer fellowships for addiction medicine specialists for direct patient care,
instructors, and clinical research for treatments.
11.Offer scholarships and supports for behavioral health practitioners or workers
involved in addressing OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH or mental health
conditions, including, but not limited to, training, scholarships, fellowships, loan
repayment programs, or other 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 MAT for
OUD, and provide technical assistance and professional support to clinicians who
have obtained a DATA 2000 waiver.
13.Disseminate 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 of
Addiction Psychiatry’s Provider Clinical Support Service for Medication–
Assisted Treatment.
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.
G-5
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-6
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 mediation 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.
11.Provide training and development of procedures for government staff to
appropriately 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 with
OUD, including reducing the stigma on effective treatment.
13.Create or support culturally appropriate services and programs for persons with
OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, including new Americans.
14.Create and/or support recovery high schools.
15.Hire or train behavioral health workers to provide or expand any of the services or
supports 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—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, those that:
G-6
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-7
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 SBIRT programs to reduce the transition from use to disorders, including
SBIRT services to 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 and
young adults when transition from misuse to opioid disorder is common.
4.Purchase automated versions of SBIRT and support ongoing costs of the
technology.
5.Expand services such as navigators and on-call teams to begin MAT in hospital
emergency departments.
6.Provide training for emergency room personnel treating opioid overdose patients
on post-discharge planning, including community referrals for MAT, recovery
case 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, into
clinically appropriate follow-up care through a bridge clinic or similar approach.
8.Support crisis stabilization centers that serve as an alternative to hospital
emergency 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 support
specialists, to connect individuals to treatment or other appropriate services
following 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 and
any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions or to persons who have experienced an
opioid 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.
G-7
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-8
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 to
appropriate services and supports for persons with OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/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 who
are involved in, are at risk of becoming involved in, or are transitioning out of the
criminal justice system through evidence-based or evidence-informed programs or
strategies 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, including
established strategies such as:
1.Self-referral strategies such as the Angel Programs or the Police Assisted
Addiction Recovery Initiative (“PAARI”);
2.Active outreach strategies such as the Drug Abuse Response Team
(“DART”) model;
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 MAT,
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.
G-8
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-9
4.Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, 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 MAT, 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 PREGNANT OR PARENTING WOMEN AND
THEIR FAMILIES, INCLUDING BABIES WITH NEONATAL ABSTINENCE
SYNDROME
Address the needs of pregnant or parenting women with OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, and the needs of their families, including babies with neonatal
abstinence syndrome (“NAS”), 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 MAT,
recovery services and supports, and prevention services for pregnant women—or
women who could become pregnant—who have OUD and any co-occurring
SUD/MH conditions, and other measures to educate and provide support to
families affected by Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.
2.Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and recovery services, including
MAT, for uninsured women 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
pregnant women and their families regarding treatment of OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
4.Expand comprehensive evidence-based treatment and recovery support for NAS
babies; expand services for better continuum of care with infant-need dyad; and
expand long-term treatment and services for medical monitoring of NAS babies
and their families.
G-9
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-10
5.Provide training to health care providers who work with pregnant or parenting
women on best practices for compliance with federal requirements that children
born with NAS get referred to appropriate services and receive a plan of safe care.
6.Provide child and family supports for parenting women with OUD and any co-
occurring SUD/MH conditions.
7.Provide enhanced family support and child care services for parents with OUD
and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions.
8.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.
9.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.
10.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.
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:
G-10
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-11
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 MAT 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.
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.
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, or
training of coalitions in evidence-informed implementation, including the
Strategic Prevention Framework developed by the U.S. Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration (“SAMHSA”).
7.Engaging non-profits and faith-based communities as systems to support
prevention.
G-11
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-12
8.Funding evidence-based prevention programs in schools or evidence-informed
school 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 demonstrated
effectiveness in preventing drug misuse and seem likely to be effective in
preventing 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 needs
of young people who may be at risk of misusing opioids or other drugs, including
emotional 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
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 harms
through 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 outreach
workers, persons being released from jail or prison, or other members of the
general 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, and
provide 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.
G-12
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-13
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 harms
associated with intravenous drug use, including supplies, staffing, space, peer
support 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 and
Hepatitis 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.
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 the
following:
1.Education of law enforcement or other first responders regarding appropriate
practices and precautions when dealing with fentanyl or other drugs.
2.Provision of wellness and support services for first responders and others who
experience 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 causes
of addiction and overdose, goals for reducing harms related to the opioid
epidemic, and areas and populations with the greatest needs for treatment
G-13
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-14
intervention services, and to support training and technical assistance and other
strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy
list.
2.A dashboard to (a) share reports, recommendations, or plans to spend opioid
settlement 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 collaborative
statewide, regional, local or community processes.
3.Invest in infrastructure or staffing at government or not-for-profit agencies to
support 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 opioid
epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list.
4.Provide resources to staff government oversight and management of opioid
abatement programs.
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.
G-14
DISTRIBUTORS’ 10.22.21
EXHIBIT UPDATES
E-15
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).
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 MAT and their association with
treatment engagement and treatment outcomes.
G-15