At least nine Nebraska counties and cities have used opioid settlement funds – money meant to be used to help the state and its residents recover from the opioid crisis – to buy controversial surveillance technology and other law enforcement tools.
Harlan County’s board gave $15,000 to the county Sheriff’s Office for Flock cameras.
Valley County spent $27,000 on nine Flock cameras of its own.
Police departments in Dakota County, Madison County and Thurston County purchased new police dogs, supplies and training.
The source of those funds: national settlements with manufacturers, pharmacies and distributors of opioids, totaling more than $50 billion. Nebraska has started receiving payments that will eventually add up to more than $150 million over an 18-year period.
The historic settlements are intended to address the opioid crisis by preventing further harm and providing services to people who are impacted by opioid use. But the Flatwater Free Press found a series of purchases by law enforcement agencies across Nebraska using settlement dollars that experts said don’t fit the spirit of the settlements.
Flatwater, in partnership with students at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s College of Journalism and Mass Communications, filed public records requests related to opioid settlement spending from all 93 Nebraska counties, along with 16 cities and six behavioral health regions.
Documents showed that counties and cities have spent at least $88,800 of opioid settlement funds on uses related to law enforcement, including the automated license plate readers, SWAT team training and equipment like gas mask holders and THC detection pouches.
Experts say the money should be used for programs that abate the opioid crisis: treatment centers, naloxone distribution and housing for people in recovery, for example.
“It’s money that’s designed to make sure that this never happens again and that we can provide desperately needed services to people who are directly impacted by the opioid crisis today,” said Brandon Marshall, professor of epidemiology at Brown University School of Public Health.
The funds are being distributed across every state in the country as a result of nationwide legal settlements in 2021 and 2022 between state attorneys general and opioid manufacturers and distributors, including Johnson & Johnson, Walmart and Walgreens.
In Nebraska, 85% of opioid settlement funds go into the state’s Opioid Recovery Fund, managed by the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services. That fund is set up to distribute money to individual programs through formal grant processes and to Nebraska’s behavioral health regions.
The other 15% is being paid directly to Nebraska counties and 16 largest cities, based on population.
Once settlement money reaches the county and city budgets, there is little oversight tracking how it’s spent.
Contracting with Flock
Harlan and Valley counties have spent more than $40,000 combined on contracts with Flock Safety, a company that makes automatic license plate reader cameras.
Valley County has faced backlash from residents about Flock, and a city within the county recently voted unanimously to ban the cameras. But the county thus far has kept its other cameras.
Each of the nine cameras that Valley County bought cost $3,000. Flock charged another $10,000 in installation and upgrade fees, which was paid from the Sheriff’s Office’s budget rather than opioid settlement funds.
Valley County Sheriff David Scheideler said Flock cameras are a justified use of opioid funds because they can be used to track vehicles used for illegal drug trafficking.
It’s hard to say if the cameras have prevented drug trafficking yet, Scheideler said, but his office is building ongoing cases.
Documents show that Harlan County’s contract with Flock for $15,000 was paid entirely with opioid settlement funds.
Harlan County Sheriff Jesse Langley said he didn’t ask the Harlan County Board of Supervisors to use opioid settlement funds on the contract, but he did present multiple scenarios where Flock cameras could be used, including for drug trafficking interdiction.
“I presented a contract to the board for the Flock cameras,” Langley said. “However, the board made the suggestion of where to spend the money, and they made the suggestion of the opioid recovery fund.”
Members of the Harlan County Board of Supervisors did not respond to requests for comment.
Flatwater Free Press also reached out to four other sheriff’s offices who spent settlement money, and they did not respond. Nebraska State Patrol deferred questions about law enforcement uses of opioid settlement funds to the Department of Health and Human Services.
The cameras have been a positive for Harlan County, Langley said. His deputies have used them to support cases, but only when they had developed probable cause.
Researchers have seen no evidence suggesting that public surveillance supports any public health role in preventing opioid-related harm, said Tyler Varisco, director of the University of Texas’s Pharmacy Addictions Research & Medicine Program.
“It’s difficult to believe that Flock or other technology would even be useful even in preventing the sale of opioids,” Varisco said. “I can’t think of a potential role for surveillance technology in this area.”
Nebraska’s Attorney General’s Office, which led Nebraska’s part in the national opioid lawsuits, specifies that funds “received by any municipality or county must be used for abatement purposes as defined by the agreements.”
The settlement agreements outlined a guide for allowable opioid remediation uses in a document called Exhibit E, said Mary Ann Borgeson, Douglas County commissioner and vice chairperson of the Nebraska Opioid Remediation Advisory Committee.
Recommended uses of opioid funds for law enforcement include education for first responders handling drugs, awareness training about medication-assisted treatment like methadone, supporting co-responder programs for substance use-related 911 calls and naloxone training for first responders.
Borgeson said she was surprised that law enforcement agencies had purchased Flock cameras with settlement funds, and she doubts that fits into the settlement’s uses.
“Of course, the more I learn about Flock cameras, the less I am supportive of them,” Borgeson said. “But with opioid monies, I don’t see where that falls under an approved use of funds under Exhibit E.”
Though the advisory committee oversees and provides recommendations to DHHS and Nebraska’s behavioral health regions, Borgeson said, it has no authority or oversight of the direct payments to cities and counties.
Other law enforcement uses
Flatwater found that the City of Beatrice spent almost $3,000 from its opioid settlement funds on SWAT training and related travel expenses for police officers in 2025.
Police Chief Jay Murphy said in an email that the department determined the training to be within the scope of opioid settlement guidelines because it “partly had to do with the dangers of drugs during search warrants and raids.”
Murphy said Beatrice is still determining how to best use the rest of the opioid settlement funds it has received so far – more than $95,000.
Multiple agencies have used opioid settlement funds to purchase K-9s and related accessories. Dakota County spent $11,500 out of the settlement funds and had a $2,000 match from a foundation. Thurston County spent about $21,000 on a K-9, vet exam, supplies, equipment and two weeks of training with associated lodging and meal reimbursements.
Borgeson also questions how K-9s fit in the settlement guidelines.
“The (behavioral health) regions have been utilizing it more for prevention, treatment and programs, which I think are a much better useful use of the funds,” Borgeson said.
Behavioral Health Region 4 also allocated $10,000 of funds to the Madison County sheriff for a K-9. Madison County had sent its opioid settlement funds to its behavioral health region, which provides services for substance use disorders.
The settlement funds are meant to help people impacted by opioids, said Patrick Habecker, a professor with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Rural Drug Addiction Research Center. He doesn’t see a direct line between that goal and these uses of the funds.
In several other states, Marshall said, there are examples of counties and sheriffs using funds for Flock cameras, other surveillance technologies and K-9s.
“I would argue that that is not in the spirit of the agreement,” Marshall said.
Louisiana allocates 20% of the funding off the top to their county sheriffs in their settlement agreement, Marshall said. The sheriffs’ spending is “all over the map,” with some investing in treatment in jails and others purchasing law enforcement equipment.
The spending records show that other municipalities in Nebraska have spent smaller sums of opioid settlement funds on equipment including THC detection pouches, a leg holster for a gas mask and a Zoom Workplace Pro subscription for the probation office.
“Looking at these funds which were literally paid for with the deaths of millions of people as a source of funding for a department to go and buy whatever they need, it’s irresponsible. It’s frustrating,” said Varisco, the opioid use disorder researcher at UT.
Pawnee County and the City of Fremont used opioid settlement funds for other first responders, purchasing supplies and emergency medications including naloxone for ambulances. Fremont’s fire department also paid for paramedic training for four people, documents show.
In many states where counties and municipalities have leeway over spending decisions, Varisco said, they use funds in a way that best supports the needs of the county, which is often funding for law enforcement, rather than looking for ways to support public health.
The people reviewing proposals at the county and city level are often not public health experts, or experts in addiction, Varisco said. They’re responsive to the things they know, and usually what they know is a law enforcement-oriented approach to addiction.
Tobacco settlements in the ’80s and ’90s were handled similarly, Varisco said, with funds distributed downstream by states and “frittered away” by counties and cities.
Experts said that transparency on funding decisions and spending is important because the money is a chance to prevent more lives lost to opioids. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that more than 800,000 people in the U.S. died from opioid overdoses from 1999 to 2023.
“We shouldn’t have to do open records requests to find out how billions of dollars in opioid settlement funds are being dispersed and allocated and used … because these dollars are really owed to the families that have lost loved ones due to the opioid crisis,” Varisco said. “And they deserve to know where the money is being spent and they deserve to provide feedback on how it is being used.”
21 Comments
This is a good article. I say that, but we both know that any time you publish anything, there are fanboys champing at the bit to lavish you with praise about what a good article you wrote. But they never articulate why the article is allegedly good (other than they agree with your political opinion). So I’m going to tell you why this article is good, and it’s mostly because of what you didn’t do, and only partly because of what you did do.
You didn’t open the article with a long, boring, irrelevant anecdote about some person shuffling around their house and feeling sad about whatever bad thing they accuse Trump of doing this time. Instead you cut right to the chase and told us what the article was about.
You didn’t center the article around interviewing entirely random people to collect their personal opinions on topics they are largely unqualified to speak about. Instead, you used public records requests to get the facts of what is happening.
I hope you notice the difference. One approach is journalism, and that was the route you wisely chose this time. But there are times when you take the other route, which looks an awful lot like Reader’s Digest, Omaha Edition. Please keep doing journalism and please keep avoiding Reader’s Digest.
Flock, Axon and other similar types of surveillance/intelligence gathering devises are the things of totalitarian, authoritarian, dictatorial, autocratic, tyrannical, communist, and oppressive governments, and have no place in the USA. They go way beyond surveillance cameras put up by private citizens.
“Experts say the money should be used for programs that abate the opioid crisis: treatment centers, naloxone distribution and housing for people in recovery, for example.”
Of course, FFP’s “experts” are just folks with opinions that differ from the actual experts in the counties who know best how to combat local drug abuse. FFP’s predetermined opposition to using opioid settlement funds for Flock cameras is not good journalism.
Now, I’d rather see these funds be spent on programs that have a more direct impact on illicit drug use, but as a self-described expert (who was not contacted by FFP for some reason), I can see how Flock cameras can and have assisted in tracking down the movement of illegal drugs and drug dealers. And it’s no big secret that counties and localities have and will spend the settlement money as they see fit–FOIAs were not required as anyone can easily view the agendas, minutes, and votes of these boards online. The spending was on the agendas, was debated, and voted on. Did the students learn about how to search and find that information?
We can all disagree about how the funds were spent, but for FFP to claim that “experts” knew/know better is absurd….unless one has an agenda that predated the writing of the article. It’s just so obvious that FFP and the students came into this story with a predetermined agenda: we shouldn’t be spending settlement funds on Flock cameras or drug dogs. That’s just poor journalism.
Do better, FFP.
We contacted the Opioid Recovery Fund prior to using our money for K9 purchase. I guess my question is, How do you not see a K9 trained in the detection of opioids as a tool to stop the Opioid crisis? That seems like common sense. Find opioids + remove opioids from the street = less opioids! Less opioids on the streets means less opportunities for people to use opioids or God Forbid a child be exposed to them! Par for the course FFP keep trying to stir people up and demonize law enforcement! FFP how about doing something productive with your time?
Dakota County Sheriff Tim Decker
Countless numbers of governmental entities did the same thing with all of the covid money that the feds shoveled out. School districts all over the country suddenly had new scoreboards, police departments suddenly had new toys for their officers to play with, etc, etc. It’s disgusting.
It goes back even further: it all started with the tobacco settlements.
States were all over the board in how they spent the tobacco settlement funds, most of which had nothing to do with ameliorating the consequences of smoking or smoking cessation programs. Nebraska was no better or worse in how it used the tobacco settlement funds compared to other states.
These settlements have become cash cows for states and localities. Let’s (including FFP) stop complaining about them–it’s time for states and the feds to cease with these settlements.
They simply increase costs for everyone.
Good article and perhaps the surveillance cameras main purpose is to watch the ai data centers especially in the rural areas
I also oppose flock cameras and flock style cameras it is bull crap
Tim Decker it is a reasonable assumption that you are against freedom of the press AKA free speech when an excellent news organization published something that you do not like!
You are negative in your attitude against flatwaterfreepress.org AKA Flat Water Free Press because they wrote an article about you that you did not like! You also tend to say that complaints about you are political. Get over that because you are a politician. You are a republican party member and just ran for sheriff and lost. Note I belong to any political party meaning I am independent
I do have a question for you what is your opinion on flock cameras and ai data centtrrs
Dean,
I am not against freedom of speech, but thanks for putting words in my mouth! Just as you are free to express your opinion, so am I. Flock Cameras have been used numerous times to solve crimes in Dakota County. I will say the new safeguards that Flock is implementing, the Sheriff’s Office has had them in place since day one. Data Centers, I am on Dakota County Planning and Zoning and we voted unanimously last night to put a year moratorium on Data Centers in Dakota County. Currently I am unaware of anyone wanting to build one in rural Dakota County. I will say that each city in the county has their own planning and zoning boards, not sure what they have reference data centers. If there are any other questions you would like answered please let me know.
Sheriff Tim Decker
Tim Decker
I do support your freedom of speech especially when I do not agree with you and I also support freedom of the press
Also thank you for responding back to me
I am opposed to flock cameras and also amazons ring door bells because we have a constitutional right to privacy driving walking or bike riding or just relaxing at a park. These private corporations have no right to know where we go or what we do! They are collecting data and constantly surveilling us. This will lead to an Orwellian Police State and destroy our freedoms. I am in no party and you are a republican party member but I bet you do not want to have America be like commie china!! I sure do not want a communist surveillance police state!! I think there is a chance that you might eventually oppose flock and amazonian cameras. That being said the lines of comminicationareolen
Tim Decker
The lines of communication are open and when you get a chance read 1984
Brave New World
Fahrenheit 451
And Player Piano
If you have not already and if you enjoy films may I suggest Metropolis which is a silent movie
“we have a constitutional right to privacy driving walking or bike riding or just relaxing at a park. ”
Actually, you do not, and no state or federal court has ever found such a “right”.
Civics 101.
There are plenty of reasons to oppose the funding of Flock cameras or other law enforcement efforts from the opioid settlements, but you have no right to privacy while engaging in public activities.
Sorry, that’s the law.
your correct about what the law reads on no right to privacy in a public setting and that being the case why is it illegal for someone like you or me to install our own cameras on public property for whatever the reasoning may be? Yet flock cameras can somehow skirt around this law?
I’m a landowner in AZ and live in NE. Lived mainly in NE for over 50-years. From my youth to current age going back and forth, I can be opinionated that NE a racist deep conservative state vs. AZ. Always behind progressive times.
FLOCK is huge Fourth Amendment violation. So much so that much of AZ has banned the cameras. They are already gone in unincorporated zones, but municipalities can still have them. Yet they are still being voted to be taken down.
Most of NE’s covered wagon counties would fit in this one AZ county. Surly po-dunk Franklin county doesn’t need a Camera?
Progress or Regress….
Just a reminder for everyone:
This website has no login mechanism and no way to verify that any person posting to these comments is who they say they are. In fact, the editor of Flatwater himself has bemoaned the “avalanche of false identities” which is often used in this comment section (even in spite of the irony that it’s his own website which is designed to allow this). Literally any person can, and often many people do, lie about who they are in these comments. This includes at least one outrageous incident I’m aware of where Flatwater wrote about a prison inmate who was allegedly prevented from accessing the internet, yet someone claiming to be that prison inmate was responding in the comments of the very article itself!
As such, we have no way to know that this is an actual Sheriff posting these messages, or that any of the people responding are providing their “real” names either.
I’m not saying this as an attack or to call anyone’s character into question (unlike the Flatwater editor), but because I encourage people to treat arguments made in these comments based on the quality of the argument itself, not based on the alleged identity or authority of the person who made the argument. Use logic, good reasoning and think for yourself, without expecting that either some government official or Flatwater will necessarily be honest with you.
Avalanche great that you are using your real name haha thatz called being hypocritical
Dean, you so completely and utterly missed the point that I wouldn’t even know where to begin correcting you.
Flatwater designed the site. If you think people need to use their real names, take it up with them.
Until that happens, I’m simply letting you know that names on this site mean nothing.
We don’t want flock cameras. We don’t live in China.
Tim Decker we do have areas of agreement ai data centers one year moratorium good start but a permanent ban is even better due to economic job losses higher water and power bills and environmental damages pollution and waste of of drinking water etcetera and they cause plus our loss of privacy and they can start NBC AKA nuclear biological and chemical warfare but again the one year moratorium is a good start and we can also communicate about areas of disagreement such as flock
Tim Decker
I do support your freedom of speech especially when I do not agree with you and I also support freedom of the press
Also thank you for responding back to me
I am opposed to flock cameras and also amazons ring door bells because we have a constitutional right to privacy driving walking or bike riding or just relaxing at a park. These private corporations have no right to know where we go or what we do! They are collecting data and constantly surveilling us. This will lead to an Orwellian Police State and destroy our freedoms. I am in no party and you are a republican party member but I bet you do not want to have America be like commie china!! I sure do not want a communist surveillance police state!! I think there is a chance that you might eventually oppose flock and amazonian cameras. That being said the lines of comminicationareolen