“I was dumbfounded,” said Jesi, a retired executive. “How do you let this money sit there in a bank while people are dying?”
The Middleton example is hardly an anomaly. Less than 5 percent of the $50 million that Massachusetts communities received from the opioid settlements so far has been spent on addiction-related services and overdose prevention efforts, according to a Globe analysis of municipal spending reports.
More than 90 percent of the 247 communities that submitted financial reports to the state hadn’t spent a single penny in the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2023. That includes most of the largest cities, all hard hit by the overdose crisis: Boston, Cambridge, Springfield, and New Bedford, which each received more than $1 million in settlement funds.
Advertisement
Steve Jesi pointed to a Narcan distribution box that was installed inside the Flint Public Library at his urging. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff
The money has sat unused while the decades-long opioid epidemic has entered a perilous new phase — marked by the rapid spread of fentanyl and other toxic substances throughout the illicit drug supply. More than 3,500 people in Massachusetts have died from drug overdoses since municipalities began receiving payouts in July 2022 — the first of about $400 million that drug companies will pay to cities and towns in the state over the next 18 years.
(Another 98 cities and towns were not required to submit reports because they received payments of less than $35,000 a year.)
“It’s inexcusable,” said Senator John Velis, a Westfield Democrat and chair of the Senate’s Mental Health, Substance Use and Recovery committee. “This should be an ‘all-hands-on-deck’ moment. This is a public health crisis . . . and we need every dollar out there to minimize harm and save lives.”
Municipal officials and groups that monitor opioid settlements say the money is being held up by local disputes over competing priorities, accounting red tape, and protracted efforts to collect community input. While the legal settlements came with clear spending guidelines, some town and city officials said they were still unsure of how to spend the money effectively and equitably, given the complexity and persistence of addiction. Others said they were moving cautiously to gather ideas from residents, including treatment specialists and those with experience living with addiction, to make sure they are making the best decisions on their behalf.
Boston, which received $6 million as of December, announced plans late last month to use some of the money for supportivehousing and for financial aid for residents who have lost loved ones to overdoses.
Advertisement
Dr. Bisola Ojikutu, executive director of the Boston Public Health Commission, said the city preferred a “very thoughtful, deliberative, and inclusive” approach that included a public survey and listening sessions in communities particularly hard hit by the opioid epidemic. The city expects to receive more than $1 million annually in settlement money through 2038.
“We will move as quickly as possible, but we’ll also be deliberative and make sure that we’re doing the right things with the money,” Ojikutu said.
The influx of opioid settlement money has been described by some public health experts as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to change how local governments address substance abuse and possibly even reverse the scourge of overdose deaths.
Yet the sluggish pace of spending is frustrating some lawmakers and families who have lost loved ones to overdoses and are demanding faster action. Some of the grieving families played a pivotal role in the legal cases that led to the multibillion-dollar settlements, and they have emerged as the most outspoken voices for dispersing the money more quickly.
“Those of us serving a life sentence of grief over the loss of our loved ones do not want that money sitting in a bank account,” said Cheryl Juaire, who lost two sons to fatal overdoses and lives in Marlborough, which has yet to spend more than $160,000 in settlement money.
Advertisement
Marc McGovern, a city councilor and vice mayor of Cambridge, said administrators have only themselves to blame for why his city has failed to spend $1.9 million in settlement funds. They spent too much time, he said, deliberating over whether to fund existing harm-reduction programs or to tackle broader issues such as the shortage of supportive housing for people with substance use disorder.
“There are a lot of ideas,” he said. “What we need is a sense of urgency.”
Cambridge so far has decided to use some of the money to buy a medical outreach van.
New Bedford’s Health Department has been meeting with public health officials across the state and is still working on “detailed, long-term action plans” for using the settlement funds to address the opioid crisis and its root causes, the city said. Lynn organized public focus groups and gave away gift cards to encourage residents to attend.
Not every city has been slow to act.
Advertisement
Worcester is among nearly a dozen that spent all their settlement money. Its initiatives include $500,000 on mobile crisis teams to respond to emergency calls involving substance use and mental health. Teams of purple-shirted social workers are dispatched in vans to crisis calls to help steer people to treatment programs and other services.
Other programs in Worcester include a new office of maternal health, which will provide support to pregnant or postpartum mothers struggling with substance use, and recovery counseling for people who are homeless or incarcerated. “It’s an awful epidemic . . . and we need programs in place that can be long-lasting and self-sustaining,” said Dr. Matilde “Mattie” Castiel, Worcester’s commissioner of health and human services.
Policy makers are determined to avoid the mistakes of the Big Tobacco settlement of 25 years ago, when much of the billions in payments to states plugged budget holes and funded public infrastructure projects instead of nicotine-prevention programs. Under the statewide opioid settlements, cities and towns must use the dollars on substance abuse prevention, treatment, and recovery programs, as well as harm-reduction strategies that seek to mitigate the deadly risk of using drugs.
Massachusetts expects to receive almost $1 billion over 18 years from settlements with opioid manufacturers and distributors. Of that, 40 percent is going to municipalities based on such factors as the number of opioid-related overdose deaths and US Drug Enforcement Agency data on the amount of opioids shipped into local communities.The remaining 60 percent goes into the state’s Opioid Recovery and Remediation Fund.
The payments do not include the settlement with Purdue Pharma, producer of OxyContin, which is undergoing court review.
Advertisement
The state has been far more decisive with its share, about $100 million thus far, funding three mobile programs for delivering methadone and addiction teams to consult at 15 hospitals, among other efforts.
The state Department of Public Health said it plans to sponsor a conference this spring to help municipalities better understand how to use the funds, including whether to team up with neighboring communities..
Steve Jesi visited the grave of his daughter Stephenie, who died of a heroin overdose. Jessica Rinaldi/Globe Staff
“Town government is picturesque and nice, but many towns are not large enough to have a public health function,” said David Rosenbloom, a professor of public health at Boston University and a member of a state advisory council on the Opioid Recovery and Remediation Fund. “Something like this [opioid epidemic] comes along and they don’t know how to respond.”
As for Jesi, the Middleton retiree turned his frustration over the unused settlement money into action. Since his visit to Town Hall, the retired executive organized a series of monthly meetings that involved the local Fire Department, public health nurses, and addiction treatment specialists. The town has since tapped about $8,000 of its settlement money to install opioid overdose “rescue kits” equipped with free Narcan in dozens of local restaurants, Dunkin’ shops, and public buildings throughout Middleton.
“Every parent who’s lost a child . . . wants to see that money out there saving lives,” said Jesi, after stopping at Middleton’s public library to check on one of the kits. “If we can save one life, then it’s worth every cent.”
Advertisement
Chris Serres can be reached at chris.serres@globe.com. Follow him @ChrisSerres.
When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) denied voters the ability to support a popular tax cut this November, it was more than a temporary loss for residents of one of America’s most overtaxed states. Barely a generation removed from its “Taxachusetts” moniker, the Commonwealth’s competitiveness suffered a setback with long-lasting implications.
That is why even if this battle is over, the broader fight must go on.
Recent polling from the Mass Opportunity Alliance (MOA), a nonprofit advocating for state competitiveness, found that 82% of voters supported lowering the state income tax rate from 5% to 4%. Even a poll from the Boston Globe/Suffolk University released days before the SJC decision showed 66% supporting the tax cut.
Terrified by the threat to the status quo, entrenched special interests spearheaded a legal challenge not based on the merits of the tax cut or fiscal policy whatsoever. The issue was a technicality in summary of the question written by the Attorney General. As a retired SJC justice explained, “neither logic nor law” supported removing the tax cut from the ballot.
Advertisement
The Court’s ruling does not change the underlying issue. The same Suffolk survey showed a majority (54%) of respondents had considered leaving the state in the last year. Nearly six in ten cited taxes and high cost of living.
This trend is well underway. Following the Commonwealth’s last tax hike in 2022, roughly 30,000 more people exited Massachusetts than arrived the following year — one of the country’s highest population exoduses. The outflow took $4.2 billion dollars’ worth of taxable income with them.
It’s no mystery as to why we’re losing residents. Survey research from MOA showed high taxes were a key driver. Not coincidentally, the top two states welcoming Massachusetts expatriates, Florida and New Hampshire, both have no income tax.
By contrast, Massachusetts has the second highest effective tax rate in the country. The Commonwealth is ranked in the bottom 10 for competitiveness.
The impact of this tax burden extends far and wide. Businesses are choosing to leave or relocate elsewhere. Iconic brands like Cape Cod Potato Chips have had enough, announcing the closing of their Hyannis facility earlier this year. Even international soccer players are not safe, learning that 90 minutes of participation in this year’s World Cup can subject them to crushing Beacon Hill tax policies.
Advertisement
Massachusetts is not alone in the blue state exodus. Frustrated by high taxes, endless regulation and overall unaffordability, families and businesses are fleeing California, Illinois and New York for friendlier terrain.
What are the consequences of fewer residents? For starters, less people to tax. Smaller tax bases means less resources for schools, roads and public safety – investments that tax hike advocates typically claim to care about.
Smaller populations also mean less national influence. In 2010, the congressional delegation shrank from 10 to 9 members, and only narrowly avoided losing another member in 2020. It’s anyone’s guess what the end of this decade will bring, but current trends are not encouraging.
So what’s next?
Fortunately, a second common sense tax proposal remains on track for the ballot this fall. By reforming the state tax revenue limit, the initiative would put the brakes on spendthrift politicians and return money to the taxpayers who earned it.
Advertisement
To be clear, the court’s ruling does not excuse the role of the legislators. Their constituents were denied the right to make their voices heard. As their elected representatives, members of the Massachusetts legislature should be fighting for families struggling with high taxes and some of the highest costs in the nation.
“Affordability” cannot just be a political buzz word; it must be a governing principle.
Two hundred fifty years ago, Massachusetts started a revolution against an oppressive government that led to the founding of our nation. That spirit lives on today, and so does the need for change. That starts by continuing the fight for common sense tax relief by every available avenue to keep the Commonwealth competitive for the next 250 years and beyond.
Colin Reed is a senior advisor to the Mass Opportunity Alliance
BOSTON (WHDH) – Just over one week after Massachusetts lawmakers announced a new, statewide initiative to combat wrong-way driving and improve roadway safety, law enforcement responded to another deadly wrong-way crash in Northboro Wednesday night.
With all of the recent tragedies, including the death of Massachusetts State Police trooper Kevin Trainor in Lynnfield last month, officials said they have pinpointed 100 locations to put on the priority list to make important safety changes as quickly as possible.
The $75-million detection and prevention program includes advanced detection technology, enhanced roadway signage, infrastructure improvements, and targeted safety upgrades across Massachusetts.
“They’ve been demonstrated to work in other places where they’ve been implemented, and even in Massachusetts the ones that are already in place, there is plenty of documented evidence showing people realizing they’re going the wrong way when those systems are activated,” said Mark Schieldrop of Triple A.
Advertisement
In Barnstable, those changes have already been implemented along Route 6. State Representative Steven Xiarhos said the area can be tricky to navigate.
“Lots of moving parts, a college right down the road, and someone could make the wrong move when they’re confused, and that’s one of those interactions that could be confusing,” Xiarhos said.
Schieldrop said there are many reasons for wrong-way driving, but one stands out above the rest.
“When we look at the typical wrong-way driver who’s causing these crashes, by and large alcohol impairment is a factor in the vast majority of them,” Schieldrop said.
Xiarhos said the prorgam is worth every penny if it will save lives.
Advertisement
“It’s frustrating when a horrible thing happens, you can’t turn back the clock,” he said. “So as an elected offical now, as a former police officer, let’s do everything we can to prevent this.”
The safety installations around the state will continue into 2027.
(Copyright (c) 2026 Sunbeam Television. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Join our Newsletter for the latest news right to your inbox
Gas prices dipped below $4 a gallon in Massachusetts Thursday for the first time in exactly two months.
According to AAA, the average price for a gallon of regular gas in Massachusetts is now $3.99, down from $4.02 on Wednesday.
That’s the first time the average fell below the $4 mark since April 25.
Advertisement
The national average on Thursday was $3.92 a gallon, AAA said. That average was above $4 for nearly three months before it fell to $3.99 a week ago on June 18.
Gas prices rose sharply after the war between the U.S. and Iran started on February 28.
A spokesperson for GasBuddy, which also tracks fuel price data, said the national average has been dropping for six weeks as the “recent U.S.-Iran framework agreement has helped ease supply fears.”
The company said the national average should keep falling to $3.75 by July 4.
“Six weeks of declines sounds like good news, and in some ways it is, but the context matters,” Patrick De Haan, a petroleum expert at GasBuddy, said in a statement Thursday.
Advertisement
“At roughly $3.75, this would be the second most expensive July 4 ever recorded, roughly 65 cents higher than last year and nearly $1 above where prices started in 2026. The U.S.-Iran agreement gives markets hope, but it’s being tested, and any breakdown in those talks could reverse the recent relief quickly. Drivers should use every tool available to find the lowest prices near them before filling up.”
A year ago at this time, the average price for a gallon of gas in Massachusetts was $3.10, according to AAA.
The all-time high in the state is $5.05 a gallon, set back in June 2022.