Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWORKSHOP re Opioid Settlements Regular Agenda JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AGENDA REQUEST TO: Board of Commissioners Josh Peters, County Administrator FROM: Philip C. Hunsucker, Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney DATE: October 20,2025 RE: Status of Pending Nine New Opioid Settlements STATEMENT OF ISSUE: On September 15, 2025, the Board of County Commissioners approved opting into 9 new settlements are with Purdue Pharma and the Sackers, who own the controlling interest in Purdue Pharma and 8 other manufacturers (the G8): 1. Alvogen, Inc. 2. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 3. Apotex Inc.; 4. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.; 5. Indivior Inc.; 6. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.; 7. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.; and, Zydus Pharmaceuticals(USA), Inc. As with all prior settlements, all of these 9 new settlements require the all local jurisdictions to opt into the settlements. There was an opt in form for the Purdue Pharma/Sackler settlement and one opt in form for the G8 settlements. Both of these opt in forms were filed on behalf of Jefferson County on September 16, 2025 and receipt was confirmed on September 17, 2025. At the time the forms were filed, the Purdue Pharma/Sackler opt in was due on September 30, 2025 and opt in form for the G8 settlements was due October 8, 2025. These deadlines were subsequently extended to October 30, 2025 and November 5, 2025 respectively. 1 Regular Agenda ANALYSIS: A memorandum from the Prosecuting Attorney's Office was provided with the agenda request for September 15, 2025, which explains the settlements. A copy of the PAO's memorandum is attached. FISCAL IMPACT: The previous opioid settlements have generated about $2 million in recoveries for the county. With 100 percent local government participation in the settlements,the Washington Attorney General's Office estimates that the Jefferson County's share of the 9 settlements will be $2,556,418.26, paid out over time. RECOMMENDATION: Listen to a briefing from the PAO on the status of the settlements. Then, schedule another briefing from the PAO on the settlements on November 10, 2025, after the extended deadlines have passed. DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Philip C. Hunsucker, Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney at Extension 219. REVIEWED BY: // Josh D. Peters, County Administrator Date rr. f 4 Al_ A igfif . . i i i) :.I i,1 .--1 , „:,,, . Opioid Mass Tort Litigation _ . .. _ -- .-i 1 1 l‘itki , ,,, , „,1 � Status of Pending Settlements,,. , ,,. :. - , iri ti :� November 10, 2025 4 -tt. y .' - - ,;.�::„ -4-'.."- ;... ,, Presentation by Y ,.,. ' 4. . . t; �; Philip C. Hunsucker, Chief Civil DPA 5 ', November 10, 2025 OPIOIDS STATUS 1 Opioid Litigation Overview .. ,i. ,'k. Nei,_`,— (:,;" :: Jefferson County sued manufacturers, distributors, and pharmacies who created the ‘ opioid crisis in the MDL in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Keller Rohrback represents Jefferson County and other Washington municipalities on a FCR contingent fee. C Jefferson because created a ublic nuisance in Jefferson Pillif County joinedbig pharmap County and the PAO determined there was a potential for recovery.C One Washington Settlement created an allocation model for distribution of 0.4417137380% to Jefferson County of settlement amounts paid to WA State. SBH-ASO Salish Behavioral Health Administrative Services Organization (SBH-ASO) ensures all -- settlements are used for Opioid Abatement, which is broadly defined. November lb 2O25 OPIOIDS STATUS G All Settlements Must Be Used for Opioid Abatement '<., SNING "All Opioid Funds, regardless of allocation, shall be utilized pursuant to Approved Purposes as defined herein and set forth in Exhibit A. Compliance with this requirement shall be verified through reporting, as set out in this MOU." One Washington Settlement at 2. Opioid settlement funds only can be used to: "Support treatment of Opioid Use Disorder (OUD) and any co-occurring Substance Use Disorder or Mental Health (SUD/MH) conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies," including those listed in Exhibit A. One Washington Settlement, Exhibit A. November 10,2025 OPIOIDS STATUS a(1N Opioid Litigation — Settlements So Far About $2 Million /! Jefferson County's Opioid Settlement Recoveries as of " `'`, November 10 2025 Distributor Settlement $896,804.78 Janssen J&J Settlement 1h. $218,933.00 Walmart Settlement $129,632.68 Aller• en Settlement $103, 100.73 Teva Settlement $173,059.73 CVS Settlement $228,917.95 Wal • reens Settlement $248,924.30 TOTAL $1 ,999,373. 17 November 10, 2025 OPIOIDS STATUS $oN c 0 ioid Settlements So Far — Est. Annual Payments to the Countyw ��, p Y lt. 4, Payment I .'Sf1INU Year Distributor Janssen WalMart•• Allergan Teva CVS Walgreens 2022 $70,766.72 2023 $36,262.38 $71,485.24 $13,265.27 $11,989.61 $14,744.11 $28,716.20 2024 $45,387.50 $27,013.38 $13,265.27 $11,989.61 $11,754.75 2025 $45,387.50 $28,043.55 $14,145.35 $11,989.61 $23,490.87 $11,417.98 2026 $45,387.50 $1,030.17 $15,606.21 $11,989.61 $23,490.87 $11,417.98 2027 $45,387.50 $1,030.17 $15,606.21 $12,257.83 $26,964.61 $11,417.98 2028 $60,295.72 $1,030.17 $15,606.21 $14,105.43 $27,636.32 $11,417.98 2029 $62,801.38 $15,606.21 $14,105.43 $26,255.60 $11,729.39 2030 $62,801.38 $14,105.43 $24,874.88 $20,350.85 2031 $52,790.90 $14,105.43 $24,852.97 $20,350.85 2032 $52,790.90 $14,105.43 $24,852.97 $20,350.85 2033 $52,790.90 $14,105.43 $20,350.85 2034 $52,790.90 $14,105.43 $20,350.85 2035 $52,790.90 $14,105.43 $20,350.85 2036 $52,790.90 $40,701.69 2037 $52,790.90 2038 $52,790.90 Totals: $896,804.78 $129,632.68 $103,100.73 $173,059.71 $228,917.95 $248,924.30 •Local Government allocation of LG Share(50%)of Washington State Base and maximum incentive Abatement Payments less estimated Government Fee Fund withholding. "Worst case maximum payment scenario. WalMart payments may be completed in as few as 3 years. November 10, 2025 OPIOIDS STATUS ,ON k0 Opioid Litigation — 9 New Settlements The Sacklers will pay $1 .5 billion and Purdue will pay approximately $900 million in the first payment, followed by $500 million after one year, an additional $500 million after two years, and $400 million after PURDUE three years. The AGO values the Washington payout on this settlement at "$105.6 million payable over 15 years." This settlement is the nation's largest settlement to date with companies responsible for the opioid crisis. QAlvogen Alvogen, Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $19 million. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc. to pay up to approximately $74 million over 10 years, and to provide either i mneaI approximately $177 million of its generic version of the drug Narcan or up to an additional approximately $44 million in cash. November 10,2025 OPIOIDS STATUS rN co Opioid Litigation — 9 New Settlements o`SEtl NC;C SCSC Aponte Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $65 million. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $98 million, and to provide hikma. either approximately $35 million of its naloxone product or up to an additional approximately $7 million in cash Indivior Inc. to pay up to approximately $75 million over five years, a portion of which, at the election of An INDIVIOR the state, could be paid in the form of Indivior's branded buprenorphine or nalmefene products with a value of up to $140 million. November 10,2025 OPIOIDS STATUS ,oN Opioid Litigation — 9 New Settlements „. III Mylan Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to pay up to approximately $290 million over nine years. SUN Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $32 million. PHARMA /41 zydu Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA), Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $15 million. November 10, 2025 OPIOIDS STATUS `,ON c, Opioid Litigation — 9 New Settlements „. Washington Attorney General's Office (AGO): Since all cities and counties participate in all of the settlements, local governments in Washington "will collectively receive approximately $61 .1 million over 15 years." The AGO estimates that the Jefferson County's share of the 9 settlements will be $2,556,418.26, paid out over time. The Purdue Pharma/Sackler settlement is dependent on Purdue's ongoing bankruptcy proceedings, which could be subject to a lengthy appeals process, we do not yet know when payments are likely to begin. N G8 settlements are expected to be finalized in early January 2026 with payments potentially starting in the first quarter of 2026. November 10, 2025 OPIOIDS STATUS ---.'. Thank you Questions .? _....... November 10,2025 10 OPIOIDS STATUS � ON C' it. JAMES M. KENNEDY Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney 9s4 1 N G10 Philip C.Hunsucker,Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Jefferson County Prosecutor's Office Christopher R.Ashcraft,Chief Criminal Deputy Prosecutor 1820 Jefferson Street Melissa Pleimann,Civil Deputy Prosecutor Post Office Box 1220 Arid Speser,Civil Deputy Prosecutor Port Townsend,WA 98368 Holly Graham,Deputy Prosecutor Phone:(360)385-9180 Jeremiah Luther,Deputy Prosecutor Fax:(360)385-9186 Jeffrey Chalfant,Deputy Prosecutor www.co.Jefferson.wa.us/prosecutor Jim Funaro,Victim Services Lysa Phillis,Child Support Enforcement Officer MEMORANDUM Date: September 8, 2025 To: Board of County Commissioners From: Philip C. Hunsucker,Chief Civil DPA Re: Nine New Opioid Settlements — Request for Authorization to Join All Settlements Commissioners: It is rare that a legal department is the source of funds for its client. Previous opioid settlements have generated about$2 million in recoveries for the county. Jefferson County's Opioid Settlement Recoveries as of September 5,2025 Distributor Settlement $896,804.78 Janssen(J&J) Settlement $218,933.00 Walmart Settlement $129,632.68 Allergen Settlement $103,100.73 Teva Settlement $173,059.73 CVS Settlement $228,917.95 Walgreens Settlement $248,924.30 TOTAL $1,999,373.17 Under the leadership of James Kennedy,the PAO is happy to report that 9 new nationwide opioid settlements in principle (the 9 settlement) have been reached that likely will result in up to $2,556,418.26 in new recoveries for the county, provided the county opts into them. On August 28, 2025, the Washington Attorney General's Office (AGO) wrote to strongly encourage all local jurisdictions in Washington opt in to all of the 9 settlements. According to the September 8,2025 Page 2 Washington Attorney General's Office (AGO), if all cities and counties participate in all of the settlements, local governments in Washington "will collectively receive approximately $61.1 million over 15 years." The AGO estimates that the Jefferson County's share of the 9 settlements will be$2,556,418.26, paid out over time. The PAO and the county's outside counsel, Keller Rohrback, also recommend that the county opt in to all of the 9 settlements for the reasons discussed below. The 9 Settlements The 9 settlements are with Purdue Pharma and the Sacker family,who own the controlling interest in Purdue Pharma, and another 8 manufacturers of opioids being referred to as"the G8:" 1. Alvogen, Inc. 2. Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; 3. Apotex Inc.; 4. Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.; 5. Indivior Inc.; 6. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.; 7. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.; and, 8. Zydus Pharmaceuticals(USA), Inc. As with all prior settlements, all of the 9 settlements require the all local jurisdictions to opt into the settlements to receive the top settlement amount. There is an opt in form for the Purdue Pharma/Sackler settlement due September 30, 2025 and another form for all the G8 settlements due October 8, 2025. All of necessary forms have been completed and signed by me. All are attached. The BoCC should authorize me to send the forms to the settlement administrator on or before September 30, 2025. These forms require a contact person for the county, and having the PAO be the place of contact makes the most sense since we have guided all prior finalizations of opioid settlements. We will not know until after October 8, 2025 the level of participation of all local governments, which affects the payouts in the settlements. Therefore,the county cannot count on the funds from the 9 settlements yet. All the prior opioid settlements had 100% participation by local governments. It is reasonable to expect the same with the 9 settlements. September 8,2025 Page 3 I suggest we have a workshop to discuss the 9 settlements, including the payouts to the county the second Monday after October 8.That will give everyone the necessary time to calculate the amount of recovery for the 9 settlements. More detailed information on the 9 settlements is below. Purdue/Sackler Direct Settlement and the Purdue Bankruptcy Plan Purdue Pharma is the largest and worst-behaved opioid manufacturer. States and local governments, including Jefferson County, have fought for many years to achieve this settlement. According to a story by National Public Radio, the National Prescription Opiate Litigation Plaintiffs'Executive Committee said, "After five years of litigation and three years in bankruptcy, we are pleased that all 55 eligible states and territories have unanimously agreed to accept" the Purdue Pharma/Sackler settlement. The county's outside counsel, Keller Rohrback, is a member of this executive committee. As reported to you on June 13,2025,the AGO joined the Purdue Pharma/Sacker settlement;along with 100% of the other eligible states and territories. All the eligible states and territories agreed to the Government Entity Settlement Agreement or"GESA,"which requires payment of a total of $7.4 billion. This settlement includes a direct settlement with the Sackler family and a connected new bankruptcy plan for Purdue Pharma, which has been approved by the Bankruptcy Court. The AGO also agreed that the Purdue Pharma/Sackler settlement is subject to the One Washington Agreement to which Jefferson County is a party,which allocates to local governments 50%of the settlement proceeds. Jefferson County's percentage of the recovery (0.4417137380%) is determined by the formula in the One Washington Agreement. The Sacklers will pay $1.5 billion and Purdue will pay approximately $900 million in the first payment, followed by$500 million after one year, an additional $500 million after two years,and $400 million after three years. The AGO values the Washington payout on this settlement at "$105.6 million payable over 15 years." This settlement is the nation's largest settlement to date with companies responsible for the opioid crisis. You may recall that both Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family were part of an earlier effort to settle all their opioid liability as part of the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy. The first Purdue Pharma bankruptcy plan was approved by the bankruptcy court and was appealed up to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held in a 5/4 decision that the Bankruptcy Code does not authorize a release and injunction that,as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11,effectively sought to discharge claims against the Sacklers who were not bankruptcy debtors,without the consent of affected claimants. Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P.,603 U.S.204,204, 144 S.Ct.2071,2074, 219 L.Ed.2d 721, 725 (2024). This Supreme Court decision overturned jurisprudence that prevailed in the majority of U.S. appellate courts that promoted comprehensive resolution of complex personal injury and property damage litigation. September 8,2025 Page 4 Recently, the new settlement that includes the Sackler family and Purdue Pharma was reached. The new settlement includes a separately approved new Purdue Pharma Bankruptcy Plan and a separate direct settlement of the claims of states and local governments, who must opt in to the settlement to participate. Alvogen,Amneal,Apotex, Hikma, Indivior, Mylan, Sun, and Zydus(G8) Settlements As reported to you on July 15, 2025, proposed nationwide settlement agreements have been reached that would resolve opioid litigation brought by states, local political subdivisions, and special districts against eight opioids manufacturers, Alvogen, Amneal, Apotex, Hikma, Indivior, Mylan, Sun, and Zydus. The G8 settlements will provide a maximum of approximately$720 million in cash to participating states and subdivisions to remediate and abate the impacts of the opioid crisis. Depending on participation by states and subdivisions,the G8 settlements require: Alvogen, Inc.to immediately pay up to approximately$19 million; Amneal Pharmaceuticals,Inc.to pay up to approximately$74 million over 10 years,and to provide either approximately $177 million of its generic version of the drug Narcan or up to an additional approximately$44 million in cash; Apotex Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $65 million; Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $98 million, and to provide either approximately $35 million of its naloxone product or up to an additional approximately $7 million in cash; Indivior Inc. to pay up to approximately $75 million over five years, a portion of which, at the election of the state, could be paid in the form of Indivior's branded buprenorphine or nalmefene products with a value of up to$140 million.; Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. to pay up to approximately $290 million over nine years; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $32 million; and Zydus Pharmaceuticals(USA), Inc. to immediately pay up to approximately $15 million. The G8 settlements also contain injunctive relief governing opioid marketing,sale,distribution,or distribution practices and require the G8 to implement safeguards to prevent diversion of prescription opioids. According to the AGO,the"Washington reached settlement agreements with [the G8] totaling up to $16.7 million, with payment schedules ranging from one to ten years." (Emphasis in original.) September 8, 2025 Page 5 Recommendations: 1. The county should opt into all of the 9 settlements before September 9, 2025. 2. The BoCC should authorize me to send the necessary opt in forms to the settlement administrator on or before September 30, 2025. All of the necessary forms have been completed and signed by me. All are attached to this memorandum. The BoCC's authorization can be done by a motion approved by the majority of the BoCC as follows:I move to authorize Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Philip Hunsucker to sign and send in the necessary opt in forms for Jefferson County to participate in the Purdue Pharma/Sacker settlement and the G8 settlement. 3. The BoCC should have a workshop on October 20, 2025 to discuss the final payout amounts, since total local government participation will not be known until after October 8,2025. If you have questions or comments,please let me know. '� �cw�yo\ at.{ C 44.4•461-9"— 11110 ''s"a�c't°~ Philip C. Hunsucker Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney pronouns: he/him/his Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office P.O. Box 1220, Port Townsend, WA 98368 Ph: 360-385-9219 (direct) Email: phunsucker@co.jefferson.wa.us cc: James Kennedy,Ariel Speser, and Melissa Pleimann EXHIBIT K Subdivision Participation and Release Form Governmental Entity: Jefferson County State: Washington Authorized Official: Philip C. Hunsucker,Chief Civil DPA Address 1: 1820 Jefferson Street Address 2: P.O.Box 1220 City, State, Zip: Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: (360)385-9129 Email: paochiefcivil@co.jefferson.wa.us The governmental entity identified above ("Governmental Entity"), in order to obtain and in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to that certain Governmental Entity & Shareholder Direct Settlement Agreement accompanying this participation form (the "Agreement")', and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in the Agreement, grant the releases set forth below, and agrees as follows. 1. The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed the Agreement, and agrees that by executing this Participation and Release Form, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in the Agreement and become a Participating Subdivision as provided therein. 2. The Governmental Entity shall promptly after the Effective Date, and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment, dismiss with prejudice any Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims that it has filed. With respect to any Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims pending in In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation,MDL No.2804, the Governmental Entity authorizes the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee to execute and file on behalf of the Governmental Entity a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice substantially in the form found at https://nationalopioidsettlement.com. 3. The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of the Agreement pertaining to Participating Subdivisions as defined therein. 4. By agreeing to the terms of the Agreement and becoming a Releasor, the Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable, monetary payments beginning following the Effective Date. 5. The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through the Agreement 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 and to the extent provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent provided in, the Capitalized terms used in this Exhibit K but not otherwise defined in this Exhibit K have the meanings given to them in the Agreement or,if not defined in the Agreement,the Master Settlement Agreement. K-1 Agreement. The Governmental Entity likewise agrees to arbitrate before the National Arbitration Panel as provided in, and for resolving disputes to the extent otherwise provided in,the Agreement. 7. The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce the Agreement as provided therein. 8. The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for all purposes in the Agreement, including without limitation all provisions of Article 10 (Release), and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in his or her official capacity whether 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 Subdivision Releasor,to the maximum extent of its authority, for good and valuable consideration, the adequacy of which is hereby confirmed, the Shareholder Released Parties and Released Parties are, as of the Effective Date, hereby released and forever discharged by the Governmental Entity and its Subdivision Releasors from: any and all Causes of Action,including,without limitation,any Estate Cause of Action and any claims that the Governmental Entity or its Subdivision Releasors would have presently or in the future been legally entitled to assert in its own right (whether individually or collectively), notwithstanding section 1542 of the California Civil Code or any law of any jurisdiction that is similar, comparable or equivalent thereto (which shall conclusively be deemed waived), whether existing or hereinafter arising, in each case, (A) directly or indirectly based on, arising out of, or in any way relating to or concerning, in whole or in part, (i) the Debtors, as such Entities existed prior to or after the Petition Date, and their Affiliates, (ii)the Estates, (iii)the Chapter 11 Cases, or (iv) Covered Conduct and (B) as to which any conduct, omission or liability of any Debtor or any Estate is the legal cause or is otherwise a legally relevant factor(each such release,as it pertains to the Shareholder Released Parties, the "Shareholder Released Claims", and as it pertains to the Released Parties other than the Shareholder Released Parties, the "Released Claims"). For the avoidance of doubt and without limiting the foregoing: the Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims include any Cause of Action that has been or may be asserted against any Shareholder Released Party or Released Party by the Governmental Entity or its Subdivision Releasors (whether or not such party has brought such action or proceeding) in any federal, state, or local action or proceeding (whether judicial, arbitral, or administrative)(A)directly or indirectly based on, arising out of,or in any way relating to or concerning, in whole or in part, (i)the Debtors, as such Entities existed prior to or after the Petition Date, and their Affiliates, (ii) the Estates, (iii) the Chapter 11 Cases, or (iv) Covered Conduct and (B)as to which any conduct, omission or liability of any Debtor or any Estate is the legal cause or is otherwise a legally relevant factor. 9. 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 Shareholder Released Claims or Released Claims against any Shareholder Released Party or Released Party in any forum whatsoever, subject in all respects to Section 9.02 of the Master Settlement Agreement. The releases provided for herein (including the term "Shareholder Released K-2 Claims" and "Released Claims") are intended by the Governmental Entity and its Subdivision Releasors to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Shareholder Released Parties and Released Parties the broadest possible release of any liability relating in any way to Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. The Agreement shall be a complete bar to any Shareholder Released Claim and Released Claims. 10. To the maximum extent of the Governmental Entity's power, the Shareholder Released Parties and the Released Parties are, as of the Effective Date, hereby released and discharged from any and all Shareholder Released Claims and Released Claims of the Subdivision Releasors. 11. The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating Subdivision as set forth in the Agreement. 12. In connection with the releases provided for in the Agreement, 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 ply. 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 Shareholder Released Claims or such other Claims released pursuant to this release, but each Governmental Entity hereby expressly waives and fully, finally, and forever settles, releases and discharges, upon the Effective Date, any and all Shareholder Released Claims or such other Claims released pursuant to this release 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 Agreement. 13.Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of the Agreement, to which Governmental Entity hereby agrees. To the extent any portion of this Participation and Release Form not relating to the release of,or bar against,liability is interpreted differently from the Agreement in any respect,the Agreement controls. 14.Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein or in the Agreement, (x) nothing herein shall (A)release any Excluded Claims or(B)be construed to impair in any way the rights and obligations of any Person under the Agreement; and (y)the Releases set forth herein shall be subject to being deemed void to the extent set forth in Section 9.02 of the Master Settlement Agreement. K-3 I have all necessary power and authorization to execute this Participation and Release Form on behalf of the Governmental Entity. 0. C Signature: Name: Philip C. Hunsucker Title: Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Date: September 8, 2025 K-4 EXHIBIT K Secondary Manufacturers' Combined Subdivision Participation and Release Form ("Combined Participation Form") Governmental Entity: Jefferson County State: Washington Authorized Official: Philip C. Hunsucker Address 1: 1820 Jefferson Street Address 2: P.O. Box 1220 City, State,Zip: Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone: (360) 385-9129 Email: paochiefcivil@co.jefferson.wa.us The governmental entity identified above ("Governmental Entity"), in order to obtain and in consideration for the benefits provided to the Governmental Entity pursuant to each of the settlements which are listed in paragraph 1 below(each a"Secondary Manufacturer's Settlement" and collectively, "the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements"), and acting through the undersigned authorized official, hereby elects to participate in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements, release all Released Claims against all Released Entities in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements, and agrees as follows. 1. The Participating Entity hereby elects to participate in each of the following Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements as a Participating Entity: a. Settlement Agreement for Alvogen, Inc. dated April 4, 2025. b. Settlement Agreement for Apotex Corp. dated April 4, 2025. c. Settlement Agreement for Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC dated April 4, 2025. d. Settlement Agreement for Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.dated April 4, 2025. e. Settlement Agreement for Indivior Inc. dated April 4, 2025. f. Settlement Agreement for Viatris Inc. ("Mylan")dated April 4, 2025. h. Settlement Agreement for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. dated April 4,2025. i. Settlement Agreement for Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA)Inc. dated April 4, 2025. 2. The Governmental Entity is aware of and has reviewed each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements, understands that all capitalized terms not defined in this Combined Participation Form have the meanings defined in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements, and agrees that by executing this Combined Participation Form, the Governmental Entity elects to participate in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements and become a Participating Subdivision as provided in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements. 3. The Governmental Entity shall promptly, and in any event no later than 14 days after the Reference Date and prior to the filing of the Consent Judgment,dismiss with prejudice any Released Claims that it has filed against any Released Entity in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements. With respect to any Released Claims pending in In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation, MDL No. 2804, the Governmental Entity K-1 authorizes the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee to execute and file on behalf of the Governmental Entity a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice for each of the manufacturers listed in paragraph 1 above substantially in the form found at https://nationalopioidsettlement.com/additional-settlements/. 4. The Governmental Entity agrees to the terms of each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements pertaining to Participating Subdivisions as defined therein. 5. By agreeing to the terms of each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements and becoming a Releasor, the Governmental Entity is entitled to the benefits provided therein, including, if applicable, monetary payments beginning after the Effective Date. 6. The Governmental Entity agrees to use any monies it receives through each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements solely for the purposes provided therein. 7. The Governmental Entity submits to the jurisdiction of the court and agrees to follow the process for resolving any disputes related to each Secondary Manufacturer's Settlement as described in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements.' 8. The Governmental Entity has the right to enforce each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements as provided therein. 9. The Governmental Entity, as a Participating Subdivision, hereby becomes a Releasor for all purposes in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements, including without limitation all provisions related to release of any claims,2 and along with all departments, agencies, divisions, boards, commissions, districts, instrumentalities of any kind and attorneys, and any person in his or her official capacity whether 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 each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements in any forum whatsoever. The releases provided for in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements are intended by the Parties to be broad and shall be interpreted so as to give the Released Entities in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements the broadest possible bar against any liability relating in any ' See Settlement Agreement for Alvogen, Inc. Section VII.F.2; Settlement Agreement for Apotex Corp. Section VII.F.2; Settlement Agreement for Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC Section VII.F.2; Settlement Agreement for Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.Section VII.F.2;Settlement Agreement for Indivior Section VI.F.2;Settlement Agreement for Mylan Section VI.F.2;Settlement Agreement for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries,Inc.Section VII.F.2;Settlement Agreement for Zydus Pharmaceuticals(USA)Inc.Section VII.F.2. 2 See Settlement Agreement for Alvogen, Inc. Section XI; Settlement Agreement for Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC Section X; Settlement Agreement for Apotex Corp. Section XI; Settlement Agreement for Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. Section XI; Settlement Agreement for Indivior Section X; Settlement Agreement for Mylan Section X; Settlement Agreement for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. Section XI; Settlement Agreement for Zydus Pharmaceuticals(USA)Inc.Section XI. K-2 way to Released Claims and extend to the full extent of the power of the Governmental Entity to release claims. Each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements shall be a complete bar to any Released Claim against that manufacturer's Released Entities. 10. The Governmental Entity hereby takes on all rights and obligations of a Participating Subdivision as set forth in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements. 11. In connection with the releases provided for in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements, 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 in each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements, 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 each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements. 12. The Governmental Entity understands and acknowledges that each of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements is an independent agreement with its own terms and conditions. Nothing herein is intended to modify in any way the terms of any of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements,to which Governmental Entity hereby agrees,aside from the exceptions in paragraph 13 below. To the extent this Combined Participation Form is interpreted differently from any of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements in any respect,the individual Secondary Manufacturer's Settlement controls. 13. For the avoidance of doubt, in the event that some but not all of the Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements proceed past their respective Reference Dates,all releases and other commitments or obligations shall become void only as to those Secondary Manufacturers' Settlements that fail to proceed past their Reference Dates.All releases and other commitments or obligations (including those contained in this Combined Participation Form) shall remain in full effect as to each Secondary Manufacturer's Settlement that proceeds past its Reference Date, and this Combined Participation Form need not be modified, returned, or destroyed as long as any Secondary Manufacturer's Settlement proceeds past its Reference Date. K-3 I have all necessary power and authorization to execute his Co bined Participation Form on behalf of the Governmental Entity. �+ Signature: ` Name: Philip C. Hunsucker Title: Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Date: September 8, 2025 K-4 WASHINGTON STATE ALLOCATION AGREEMENT GOVERNING THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS PAID BY THE PURDUE BANKRUPTCY,SACKLERS, AND CERTAIN OPIOID MANUFACTURERS JULY 24,2025 This Washington State Allocation Agreement Governing the Allocation of Funds Paid by the Purdue Bankruptcy, Sacklers, and Certain Opioid Manufacturers(the"Allocation Agreement IV")governs the distribution of funds obtained from (1)the Purdue Bankruptcy and Sackler Direct Claims Settlement, (2)the Alvogen Settlement, (3)the Amneal Settlement, (4)the Apotex Settlement, (5)the Hikma Settlement, (6)the Indivior Settlement, (7)the Mylan Settlement, (8) the Sun Settlement, and(9)the Zydus Settlement in connection with the resolution of any and all claims by the State of Washington and the eligible counties,cities, and towns in Washington State("Local Governments")against the Settling Entities defined in the respective Settlement Agreements via the following settlements and bankruptcy plan of reorganization: • (1)The 13th Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Purdue Pharma L.P. and its Affiliated Debtors(the"Purdue Plan") , including and amendments thereto and all "Plan Documents"as defined therein, if the"Effective Date"as defined therein has occurred; (2)the Master Settlement Agreement By and Among the Master Disbursement Trust, Each of the Parties Listed On Exhibit A Hereto, Each of the Parties Listed on Exhibit B Hereto,the Sackler Parties' Representative and PR L.P. and any subsequent amendments, and(3) Government Entity& Shareholder Direct Settlement Agreement and any subsequent amendments(collectively, the"Purdue Bankruptcy and Sackler Direct Claims Settlement"). • Alvogen Settlement Agreement dated April 4, 2025 and any subsequent amendments("Alvogen Settlement"). • Amneal Settlement Agreement dated April 4, 2025 and any subsequent amendments("Amneal Settlement"). • Apotex Settlement Agreement dated April 4,2025 and any subsequent amendments("Apotex Settlement"). • Hikma Settlement Agreement dated April 4, 2025 and any subsequent amendments("Hikma Settlement"). • Indivior Settlement Agreement dated April 4, 2025 and any subsequent amendments("Indivior Settlement"). • Mylan Settlement Agreement dated April 4, 2025 and any subsequent amendments("Mylan Settlement"). • Sun Settlement Agreement dated April 4,2025 and any subsequent amendments ("Sun Settlement") 1 • Zydus Settlement Agreement dated April 4, 2025 and any subsequent amendments("Zydus Settlement") Collectively, the Purdue Bankruptcy and Sackler Settlement, Alvogen Settlement,Amneal Settlement, Apotex Settlement, Hikma Settlement, Indivior Settlement, Mylan Settlement, Sun Settlement,and the Zydus Settlement shall be referred to as"the Settlements". The Settlements can be accessed at https://nationalopioidsettlement.com/and the Purdue Plan can be accessed at https://restructuring.ra.krol I.com/purduepharma/Home- Docketlnfo?DocAttribute=4218&DocAttrName=PlanDisclosureStatement&MenuID=9013&Att ributeName=Plan%20%26%20Disclosure%20Statement.The terms and definitions of each of the respective Settlements are incorporated into this Allocation Agreement IV, and any undefined terms in this Allocation Agreement IV are as defined in the Settlements. 1. This Allocation Agreement IV is intended to be a State-Subdivision Agreement as defined in the Settlements. This Allocation Agreement IV shall be interpreted to be consistent with the requirements of a State-Subdivision Agreement in the Settlements. 2. This Allocation Agreement IV shall become effective with respect to a Settlement only if all of the following occur: A. The State of Washington joins such Settlement and becomes a Settling State as provided for in the respective Settlement and, with respect to the Purdue Bankruptcy and Sackler Settlement the State of Washington votes in favor of the Purdue Plan or does not vote against the Purdue Plan, and does not object to the confirmation of the Purdue Plan. B. Such Settlement becomes final and effective and a Consent Judgment that applies to Washington is filed and approved as provided for in the respective Settlement. For the Purdue Bankruptcy,the"Effective Date"as defined in the Purdue Plan has occurred. C. The number of Local Governments that execute and return this Allocation Agreement IV satisfies the participation requirements for a State- Subdivision Agreement as specified in such Settlement. 3. Requirements to become a Participating Local Government. To become a Participating Local Government that can participate in this Allocation Agreement IV with respect to any one of the Settlements,a Local Government must do all of the following: A. The Local Government must execute and return this Allocation Agreement IV. B. The Local Government must do the following: i. Release its claims against the Settling Entities identified in the respective Settlements and agree to be bound by the terms of the 2 Settlements by timely executing and returning the Participation Form for that Settlement and any other necessary documents. ii. Additionally, for the Purdue Bankruptcy and Sackler Direct Claims Settlement,either(1)vote in favor of or(2)abstain from voting on the Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Purdue Pharma L.P. and its Affiliated Debtors,and(3)not object to the confirmation of the Purdue Plan. C. Litigating Subdivisions, also referred to as Litigating Local Governments, must dismiss the Settling Entities identified in the respective Settlement with prejudice from their lawsuits. D. Each Local Government that is eligible to participate in this Allocation Agreement IV has previously executed and signed the One Washington Memorandum of Understanding Between Washington Municipalities ("MOU")agreed to by the Participating Local Governments in Washington State,which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. By executing this Allocation Agreement IV,the Local Government agrees and affirms that the MOU applies to and shall govern the LG Share, as defined below, as modified by this Allocation Agreement IV for each of the Settlements in which the Local Government participates. A Local Government that meets all of the conditions in this paragraph for any of the Settlements shall be deemed a"Participating Local Government"for that Settlement. A Local Government can be a"Participating Local Government"for less than all of the Settlements. If a Local Government is a Participating Local Government for less than all of the Settlements,the Local Government can only receive a portion of the Washington Abatement Amount for the specific Settlement(s)for which it is a Participating Local Government. 4. The allocations set forth in this Allocation Agreement IV apply to the following, all of which collectively shall be referred to as the"Washington Abatement Amount": A. For the Purdue Bankruptcy and Sackler Settlement, all amounts (collectively, "Washington Distributions")that are apportioned to Washington as Estate Distributions or from the Shareholder Direct Settlement Portion, including, without limitation, those to Washington's State Fund, Remediation Accounts Fund, Subdivision Fund, Direct Payment, Earned Direct Payment, and Estate Distributions for Washington and all Participating Local Governments for the Purdue Bankruptcy and Sackler Settlement,provided, however,that for the purposes of the allocations set forth in this Allocation Agreement IV, Washington Distributions shall not include State's Fees and Costs(as defined below). This Allocation Agreement IV shall be considered a State-Subdivision 3 Agreement under the Government Entity& Shareholder Direct Settlement Agreement. B. For the Alvogen Settlement,the State of Washington's(1) Statewide Payment Amount and (2)Additional Remediation Amount. C. For the Amneal Settlement,the State of Washington's(1) State Allocation and (2)Additional Remediation Amount. D. For the Apotex Settlement,the State of Washington's(1) Statewide Payment Amount and(2)Additional Remediation Amount. E. For the Hikma Settlement, the State of Washington's(1) Statewide Payment Amount and (2)Additional Remediation Amount. F. For the Indivior Settlement,the State of Washington's(1) Statewide Payment Amount and(2)Additional Remediation Amount. G. For the Mylan Settlement,the State of Washington's(1) Statewide Payment Amount and(2)Additional Remediation Amount. H. For the Sun Settlement,the State of Washington's(1) Statewide Payment Amount and(2)Additional Remediation Amount. I. For the Zydus Settlement,the State of Washington's(1) Statewide Payment Amount and(2)Additional Remediation Amount. As specified in each of the Settlements,the Washington Abatement Amount will vary depending on the percentage of Participating Local Governments and whether there are any Later Litigating Subdivisions. 5. The(1)Amneal Settlement, (2)Hikma Settlement, and(3) Indivior Settlement each provide the option for Settling States to obtain Settlement Product or the discretion to convert any portion of the Settlement Product allocated to the Settling State into a cash value as specified in those Settlements of the Settling State's allocated Settlement Product in specified years. It shall be solely the decision of the State regarding whether to convert any portion of the Settlement Product allocated to Washington into a cash value or to obtain the Settlement Product for each of those Settlements. If the State elects to obtain Settlement Product for a particular Settlement,the State in its sole discretion shall make all decisions related to the Settlement Product, including but not limited to where, how, and to whom it shall be distributed. For purposes of calculating the division of the Washington Abatement Amount in Paragraph 10 of this Allocation Agreement IV,the Settlement Product allocated to Washington shall be considered"State Share"and shall have the cash conversion value assigned to it in the respective Settlement Agreements, i.e.,the"Settlement Product Cash Conversion Amount"or the"Cash Conversion Amount" identified in those settlements. 4 6. The allocations set forth in this Allocation Agreement IV do not apply to(i)the State Cost Fund, State AG Fees and Costs, State Expense Fund, State AG Fees, State Direct Expenses, or any attorneys' fees, fees,costs,or expenses referred to in the Settlement or via Fee Petitions or that are paid directly or indirectly via the Settlements or court order to the State of Washington and/or its outside counsels ("State's Fees and Costs")or to(ii)any payments made to Participating Subdivisions pursuant to section 5.9 of the Purdue Plan, which provides for a Local Government Fee Fund. 7. This Allocation Agreement IV and the MOU are a State Back-Stop Agreement. The Settling Entities are paying a portion of the Local Governments' attorneys' fees and costs as provided for in the Settlements. The total contingent fees an attorney receives from the Contingency Fee Fund in the Settlements,the MOU, and this Allocation Agreement IV combined cannot exceed 15%of the portion of the LG Share paid to the Litigating Local Government that retained that firm to litigate against the Settling Entities(i.e., if City X filed suit with outside counsel on a contingency fee contract and City X receives $1,000,000 from the Walmart Settlement,then the maximum that the firm can receive is$150,000 for fees as to the Walmart Settlement; if City X did not retain the same firm for potential litigation against CVS and City X receives$1,000,000 from the CVS Settlement, then the firm receives no fees from the CVS Settlement.) 8. No portion of the State's Fees and Costs and/or the State Share as defined in Paragraphs 6 and 10 of this Allocation Agreement IV shall be used to fund the Government Fee Fund("GFF")referred to in Paragraph 12 of this Allocation Agreement IV and Section D of the MOU, or in any other way to fund any Participating Local Government's attorneys' fees,costs,or common benefit tax. 9. The Washington Abatement Amount shall and must be used by the State and Participating Local Governments for future Opioid Remediation as defined in the Settlements, except as allowed by the Settlements. 10. The State and the Participating Local Governments agree to divide the Washington Abatement Amount as follows: A. Fifty percent(50%)to the State of Washington("State Share"). B. Fifty percent(50%)to the Participating Local Governments("LG Share"). 11. The LG Share shall be distributed to Participating Local Governments pursuant to the MOU attached hereto as Exhibit 1 as amended and modified in this Allocation Agreement IV. 12. For purposes of this Allocation Agreement IV only, the MOU is modified as follows and any contrary provisions in the MOU are struck: 5 A. Exhibit A of the MOU is replaced by the Exhibit specifying the List of Opioid Remediation Uses for each of the respective Settlements,which generally can be found at Exhibit E of the respective Settlements. B. The definition of"Litigating Local Governments"in Section A.4 of the MOU shall mean Litigating Subdivisions as defined in each the respective Settlements and shall also include any local government that notified Judge Polster in Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP of its intent to sue any of the settling entities that are covered by this Allocation Agreement. C. The definition of"National Settlement Agreement" in Section A.6 of the MOU shall mean the Settlements. D. The definition of"Settlement" in Section A.14 of the MOU shall mean the Settlements and expressly includes the Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Purdue Pharma L.P.and its Affiliated Debtors. E. The MOU is amended to add new Section C.4.g.vIV,which provides as follows: "If a Participating Local Government receiving a direct payment (a) uses Opioid Funds other than as provided for in the respective Settlements, (b)does not comply with conditions for receiving direct payments under the MOU, or(c)does not promptly submit necessary reporting and compliance information to its Regional Opioid Abatement Counsel ("Regional OAC")as defined at Section C.4.h of the MOU,then the Regional OAC may suspend direct payments to the Participating Local Government after notice, an opportunity to cure,and sufficient due process. If direct payments to Participating Local Government are suspended,the payments shall be treated as if the Participating Local Government is foregoing their allocation of Opioid Funds pursuant to Section C.4.d and C.4.j.IVi of the MOU. In the event of a suspension,the Regional OAC shall give prompt notice to the suspended Participating Local Government and the Settlement Fund Administrator specifying the reasons for the suspension,the process for reinstatement, the factors that will be considered for reinstatement, and the due process that will be provided.A suspended Participating Local Government may apply to the Regional OAC to be reinstated for direct payments no earlier than five years after the date of suspension." F. The amounts payable to each law firm representing a Litigating Local Government from the GFF shall be consistent with the MOU and the process set forth in the Order Appointing the Fee Panel to Allocate and Disburse Attorney's Fees Provided for in State Back-Stop Agreements, Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP Doc#: 4543 (June 17, 2022). 6 G. The GFF set forth in the MOU shall be funded by the LG Share of the Washington Abatement Amount only. To the extent the common benefit tax is not already payable by the Settling Entities as contemplated by Section D.8 of the MOU, the GFF shall be used to pay Litigating Local Government contingency fee agreements and any common benefit tax referred to in Section D of the MOU, which shall be paid on a pro rata basis to eligible law firms as determined by the Settlement Administrator. H. To fund the GFF, fifteen percent(15%)of the LG Share shall be deposited in the GFF from each LG Share settlement payment until the Litigating Subdivisions' contingency fee agreements and common benefit tax(if any)referred to in Section D of the MOU are satisfied. Under no circumstances will any Primary Subdivision or Litigating Local Government be required to contribute to the GFF more than 15%of the portion of the LG Share allocated to such Primary Subdivision or Litigating Local Government. In addition, under no circumstances will any portion of the LG Share allocated to a Litigating Local Government be used to pay the contingency fees or litigation expenses of counsel for some other Litigating Local Government. I. The maximum amount of any Litigating Local Government contingency fee agreement(from the Contingency Fee Fund of the respective Settlements)payable to a law firm permitted for compensation shall be fifteen percent(15%)of the portion of the LG Share paid to the Litigating Local Government that retained that firm(i.e., if City X filed suit with outside counsel on a contingency fee contract and City X receives $1,000,000 from a Settlement,then the maximum that the firm can receive is$150,000 for fees.)The firms also shall be paid documented expenses due under their contingency fee agreements that have been paid by the law firm attributable to that Litigating Local Government.Consistent with Agreement on Attorneys' Fees,Costs, and Expenses, which is Exhibit R of the Settlements, as well as the Purdue Plan, amounts due to Participating Litigating Subdivisions' attorneys under this Allocation Agreement IV shall not impact(i)costs paid by the subdivisions to their attorneys pursuant to a State Back-Stop agreement, (ii) fees paid to subdivision attorneys from the Common Benefit Fund for common benefit work performed by the attorneys pursuant to Exhibit R of the Settlements, or(iii)costs paid to subdivision attorneys from the MDL Expense Fund for expenses incurred by the attorneys pursuant to the Settlements. J. Under no circumstances may counsel receive more for its work on behalf of a Litigating Local Government than it would under its contingency agreement with that Litigating Local Government. To the extent a law firm was retained by a Litigating Local Government on a contingency fee agreement that provides for compensation at a rate that is less than fifteen percent(15%)of that Litigating Local Government's recovery,the maximum amount payable to that law firm referred to in Section D.3 of 7 the MOU shall be the percentage set forth in that contingency fee agreement. K. For the avoidance of doubt, both payments from the GFF and the payment to the Participating Litigating Local Governments' attorneys from the Contingency Fee Fund in the respective Settlements as well as any payments made to Participating Subdivisions pursuant to section 5.9 of the Purdue Plan shall be included when calculating whether the aforementioned fifteen percent(15%)maximum percentage(or less if the provisions of Paragraph l 0.J of this Allocation Agreement IV apply)of any Litigating Local Government contingency fee agreement referred to above has been met. L. To the extent there are any excess funds in the GFF,the Settlement Administrator shall facilitate the return of those funds to the Participating Local Governments as provided for in Section D.6 of the MOU. 13. In connection with the execution and administration of this Allocation Agreement IV,the State and the Participating Local Governments agree to abide by the Public Records Act, RCW 42.56 et seq. 14. All Participating Local Governments, Regional OACs, and the State shall maintain all non-transitory records related to this Allocation Agreement IV as well as the receipt and expenditure of the funds from the Settlements for no less than five(5)years. 15. If any party to this Allocation Agreement IV believes that a Participating Local Government,Regional OAC,the State,an entity, or individual involved in the receipt, distribution,or administration of the funds from the Settlements has violated any applicable ethics codes or rules, a complaint shall be lodged with the appropriate forum for handling such matters, with a copy of the complaint promptly sent to the Washington Attorney General, Complex Litigation Division, Division Chief, 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000, Seattle, Washington 98104. 16. To the extent(i)a region utilizes a pre-existing regional body to establish its Opioid Abatement Council pursuant to the Section 4.h of the MOU,and(ii)that pre-existing regional body is subject to the requirements of the Community Behavioral Health Services Act, RCW 71.24 et seq.,the State and the Participating Local Governments agree that the Opioid Funds paid by the Settling Entities are subject to the requirements of the MOU and this Allocation Agreement IV. 17. Upon request by any of the Settling Entities,the Participating Local Governments must comply with the Tax Cooperation and Reporting provisions of the respective Settlement. 8 18. Venue for any legal action related to this Allocation Agreement IV(separate and apart from the MOU or the Settlements)shall be in King County, Washington. Washington law shall govern any dispute. 19. Each party represents that all procedures necessary to authorize such parry's execution of this Allocation Agreement IV have been performed and that such person signing for such party has been authorized to execute this Allocation Agreement IV. 9 FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: NICHOLAS W. BROWN Attorney General JEF Y . Division C 'e Date: — 10 FOR THE PARTICIPATING LOCAL GOVERNMENT: Name of Participating Local Government: Jefferson County, Washington Authorizedsignature:s g ature: Name: Philip C. Hunsucker Title: Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney September 8. 2025 Date: 11 EXHIBIT 1 One Washington Memorandum of Understanding Between Washington Municipalities 12 ONE WASHINGTON MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN WASHINGTON MUNICIPALITIES Whereas, the people of the State of Washington and its communities have been harmed by entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain who manufacture, distribute, and dispense prescription opioids; Whereas, certain Local Governments, through their elected representatives and counsel, are engaged in litigation seeking to hold these entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain of prescription opioids accountable for the damage they have caused to the Local Governments; Whereas, Local Governments and elected officials share a common desire to abate and alleviate the impacts of harms caused by these entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain throughout the State of Washington, and strive to ensure that principals of equity and equitable service delivery are factors considered in the allocation and use of Opioid Funds; and Whereas, certain Local Governments engaged in litigation and the other cities and counties in Washington desire to agree on a form of allocation for Opioid Funds they receive from entities within the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain. Now therefore, the Local Governments enter into this Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") relating to the allocation and use of the proceeds of Settlements described. A. Definitions As used in this MOU: 1. "Allocation Regions"are the same geographic areas as the existing nine (9) Washington State Accountable Community of Health(ACH) Regions and have the purpose described in Section C below. 2. "Approved Purpose(s)" shall mean the strategies specified and set forth in the Opioid Abatement Strategies attached as Exhibit A. 3. "Effective Date" shall mean the date on which a court of competent jurisdiction enters the first Settlement by order or consent decree. The Parties anticipate that more than one Settlement will be administered according to the terms of this MOU, but that the first entered Settlement will trigger allocation of Opioid Funds in accordance with Section B herein, and the formation of the Opioid Abatement Councils in Section C. 4. "Litigating Local Government(s)" shall mean Local Governments that filed suit against any Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participant pertaining to the Opioid epidemic prior to September 1, 2020. 1 5. "Local Government(s)"shall mean all counties, cities, and towns within the geographic boundaries of the State of Washington. 6. "National Settlement Agreements"means the national opioid settlement agreements dated July 21, 2021 involving Johnson&Johnson, and distributors AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health and McKesson as well as their subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, and directors named in the National Settlement Agreements, including all amendments thereto. 7. "Opioid Funds"shall mean monetary amounts obtained through a Settlement as defined in this MOU. 8. "Opioid Abatement Council"shall have the meaning described in Section C below. 9. "Participating Local Government(s)"shall mean all counties, cities, and towns within the geographic boundaries of the State that have chosen to sign on to this MOU. The Participating Local Governments may be referred to separately in this MOU as"Participating Counties"and"Participating Cities and Towns"(or"Participating Cities or Towns,"as appropriate) or"Parties." 10. "Pharmaceutical Supply Chain"shall mean the process and channels through which controlled substances are manufactured, marketed, promoted, distributed, and/or dispensed, including prescription opioids. 11. "Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participant" shall mean any entity that engages in or has engaged in the manufacture, marketing,promotion, distribution, and/or dispensing of a prescription opioid, including any entity that has assisted in any of the above. 12. "Qualified Settlement Fund Account,"or"QSF Account,"shall mean an account set up as a qualified settlement fund, 468b fund,as authorized by Treasury Regulations 1.468B-1(c)(26 CFR§1.468B-1). 13. "Regional Agreements"shall mean the understanding reached by the Participating Local Counties and Cities within an Allocation Region governing the allocation,management, distribution of Opioid Funds within that Allocation Region. 14. "Settlement"shall mean the future negotiated resolution of legal or equitable claims against a Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participant when that resolution has been jointly entered into by the Participating Local Governments. "Settlement"expressly does not include a plan of reorganization confirmed under Title 11 of the United States Code, irrespective of the extent to which Participating Local Governments vote in favor of or otherwise support such plan of reorganization. 2 15. "Trustee"shall mean an independent trustee who shall be responsible for the ministerial task of releasing Opioid Funds from a QSF account to Participating Local Governments as authorized herein and accounting for all payments into or out of the trust. 16. The"Washington State Accountable Communities of Health"or "ACH"shall mean the nine(9)regions described in Section C below. B. Allocation of Settlement Proceeds for Approved Purposes 1. All Opioid Funds shall be held in a QSF and distributed by the Trustee, for the benefit of the Participating Local Governments, only in a manner consistent with this MOU. Distribution of Opioid Funds will be subject to the mechanisms for auditing and reporting set forth below to provide public accountability and transparency. 2. All Opioid Funds, regardless of allocation, shall be utilized pursuant to Approved Purposes as defined herein and set forth in Exhibit A. Compliance with this requirement shall be verified through reporting, as set out in this MOU. 3. The division of Opioid Funds shall first be allocated to Participating Counties based on the methodology utilized for the Negotiation Class in In Re:National Prescription Opiate Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP. The allocation model uses three equally weighted factors: (1)the amount of opioids shipped to the county; (2)the number of opioid deaths that occurred in that county; and(3) the number of people who suffer opioid use disorder in that county. The allocation percentages that result from application of this methodology are set forth in the"County Total"line item in Exhibit B. In the event any county does not participate in this MOU,that county's percentage share shall be reallocated proportionally amongst the Participating Counties by applying this same methodology to only the Participating Counties. 4. Allocation and distribution of Opioid Funds within each Participating County will be based on regional agreements as described in Section C. C. Regional Agreements 1. For the purpose of this MOU, the regional structure for decision- making related to opioid fund allocation will be based upon the nine(9)pre- defined Washington State Accountable Community of Health Regions(Allocation Regions). Reference to these pre-defined regions is solely for the purpose of 3 drawing geographic boundaries to facilitate regional agreements for use of Opioid Funds. The Allocation Regions are as follows: • King County(Single County Region) • Pierce County(Single County Region) • Olympic Community of Health Region (Clallam, Jefferson, and Kitsap Counties) • Cascade Pacific Action Alliance Region (Cowlitz, Grays Harbor, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, Thurston,and Wahkiakum Counties) • North Sound Region (Island, San Juan, Skagit, Snohomish, and Whatcom Counties) • SouthWest Region(Clark, Klickitat,and Skamania Counties) • Greater Columbia Region (Asotin, Benton, Columbia, Franklin, Garfield, Kittitas, Walla Walla,Whitman,and Yakima Counties) • Spokane Region (Adams, Ferry, Lincoln, Pend Oreille, Spokane, and Stevens Counties) • North Central Region(Chelan, Douglas, Grant, and Okanogan Counties) 2. Opioid Funds will be allocated,distributed and managed within each Allocation Region, as determined by its Regional Agreement as set forth below. If an Allocation Region does not have a Regional Agreement enumerated in this MOU, and does not subsequently adopt a Regional Agreement per Section C.5,the default mechanism for allocation, distribution and management of Opioid Funds described in Section C.4.a will apply. Each Allocation Region must have an OAC whose composition and responsibilities shall be defined by Regional Agreement or as set forth in Section C.4. 3. King County's Regional Agreement is reflected in Exhibit C to this MOU. 4. All other Allocation Regions that have not specified a Regional Agreement for allocating,distributing and managing Opioid Funds, will apply the following default methodology: a. Opioid Funds shall be allocated within each Allocation Region by taking the allocation for a Participating County from Exhibit B and apportioning those funds between that Participating County and its Participating Cities and Towns. Exhibit B also sets forth the allocation to the Participating Counties and the Participating Cities or Towns within the Counties based on a default allocation formula. As set forth above in Section B.3,to determine the allocation to a county, this formula utilizes: (1)the amount of opioids shipped to the county;(2)the number of opioid deaths that occurred in that county; and(3)the number of people who suffer opioid use disorder in that county. To determine the allocation within a county,the formula utilizes historical federal data showing how the specific Counties and the Cities and Towns within the Counties have 4 made opioids epidemic-related expenditures in the past. This is the same methodology used in the National Settlement Agreements for county and intra-county allocations. A Participating County, and the Cities and Towns within it may enter into a separate intra-county allocation agreement to modify how the Opioid Funds are allocated amongst themselves,provided the modification is in writing and agreed to by all Participating Local Governments in the County. Such an agreement shall not modify any of the other terms or requirements of this MOU. b. 10%of the Opioid Funds received by the Region will be reserved, on an annual basis, for administrative costs related to the OAC. The OAC will provide an annual accounting for actual costs and any reserved funds that exceed actual costs will be reallocated to Participating Local Governments within the Region. c. Cities and towns with a population of less than 10,000 shall be excluded from the allocation,with the exception of cities and towns that are Litigating Participating Local Governments. The portion of the Opioid Funds that would have been allocated to a city or town with a population of less than 10,000 that is not a Litigating Participating Local Government shall be redistributed to Participating Counties in the manner directed in C.4.a above. d. Each Participating County, City, or Town may elect to have its share re-allocated to the OAC in which it is located. The OAC will then utilize this share for the benefit of Participating Local Governments within that Allocation Region, consistent with the Approved Purposes set forth in Exhibit A. A Participating Local Government's election to forego its allocation of Opioid Funds shall apply to all future allocations unless the Participating Local Government notifies its respective OAC otherwise. If a Participating Local Government elects to forego its allocation of the Opioid Funds,the Participating Local Government shall be excused from the reporting requirements set forth in this Agreement. e. Participating Local Governments that receive a direct payment maintain full discretion over the use and distribution of their allocation of Opioid Funds,provided the Opioid Funds are used solely for Approved Purposes. Reasonable administrative costs for a Participating Local Government to administer its allocation of Opioid Funds shall not exceed actual costs or 10%of the Participating Local Government's allocation of Opioid Funds,whichever is less. f. A Local Government that chooses not to become a Participating Local Government will not receive a direct allocation of Opioid Funds. The portion of the Opioid Funds that would have been allocated to a Local Government that is not a Participating Local Government shall be 5 redistributed to Participating Counties in the manner directed in C.4.a above. g. As a condition of receiving a direct payment, each Participating Local Government that receives a direct payment agrees to undertake the following actions: i. Developing a methodology for obtaining proposals for use of Opioid Funds. ii. Ensuring there is opportunity for community-based input on priorities for Opioid Fund programs and services. iii. Receiving and reviewing proposals for use of Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes. iv. Approving or denying proposals for use of Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes. v. Receiving funds from the Trustee for approved proposals and distributing the Opioid Funds to the recipient. vi. Reporting to the OAC and making publicly available all decisions on Opioid Fund allocation applications, distributions and expenditures. h. Prior to any distribution of Opioid Funds within the Allocation Region, The Participating Local Governments must establish an Opioid Abatement Council (OAC) to oversee Opioid Fund allocation, distribution, expenditures and dispute resolution. The OAC may be a preexisting regional body or may be a new body created for purposes of executing the obligations of this MOU. i. The OAC for each Allocation Region shall be composed of representation from both Participating Counties and Participating Towns or Cities within the Region. The method of selecting members, and the terms for which they will serve will be determined by the Allocation Region's Participating Local Governments. All persons who serve on the OAC must have work or educational experience pertaining to one or more Approved Uses. j. The Regional OAC will be responsible for the following actions: i. Overseeing distribution of Opioid Funds from Participating Local Governments to programs and services within the Allocation Region for Approved Purposes. 6 ii. Annual review of expenditure reports from Participating Local Jurisdictions within the Allocation Region for compliance with Approved Purposes and the terms of this MOU and any Settlement. iii. In the case where Participating Local Governments chose to forego their allocation of Opioid Funds: (i) Approving or denying proposals by Participating Local Governments or community groups to the OAC for use of Opioid Funds within the Allocation Region. (ii) Directing the Trustee to distribute Opioid Funds for use by Participating Local Governments or community groups whose proposals are approved by the OAC. (iii) Administrating and maintaining records of all OAC decisions and distributions of Opioid Funds. iv. Reporting and making publicly available all decisions on Opioid Fund allocation applications, distributions and expenditures by the OAC or directly by Participating Local Governments. v. Developing and maintaining a centralized public dashboard or other repository for the publication of expenditure data from any Participating Local Government that receives Opioid Funds, and for expenditures by the OAC in that Allocation Region, which it shall update at least annually. vi. If necessary, requiring and collecting additional outcome- related data from Participating Local Governments to evaluate the use of Opioid Funds, and all Participating Local Governments shall comply with such requirements. vii. Hearing complaints by Participating Local Governments within the Allocation Region regarding alleged failure to (1) use Opioid Funds for Approved Purposes or(2) comply with reporting requirements. 5. Participating Local Governments may agree and elect to share, pool, or collaborate with their respective allocation of Opioid Funds in any manner they choose by adopting a Regional Agreement, so long as such sharing, pooling, or collaboration is used for Approved Purposes and complies with the terms of this MOU and any Settlement. 7 6. Nothing in this MOU should alter or change any Participating Local Government's rights to pursue its own claim. Rather,the intent of this MOU is to join all parties who wish to be Participating Local Governments to agree upon an allocation formula for any Opioid Funds from any future binding Settlement with one or more Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants for all Local Governments in the State of Washington. 7. If any Participating Local Government disputes the amount it receives from its allocation of Opioid Funds,the Participating Local Government shall alert its respective OAC within sixty(60)days of discovering the information underlying the dispute. Failure to alert its OAC within this time frame shall not constitute a waiver of the Participating Local Government's right to seek recoupment of any deficiency in its allocation of Opioid Funds. 8. If any OAC concludes that a Participating Local Government's expenditure of its allocation of Opioid Funds did not comply with the Approved Purposes listed in Exhibit A,or the terms of this MOU,or that the Participating Local Government otherwise misused its allocation of Opioid Funds,the OAC may take remedial action against the alleged offending Participating Local Government. Such remedial action is left to the discretion of the OAC and may include withholding future Opioid Funds owed to the offending Participating Local Government or requiring the offending Participating Local Government to reimburse improperly expended Opioid Funds back to the OAC to be re-allocated to the remaining Participating Local Governments within that Region. 9. All Participating Local Governments and OAC shall maintain all records related to the receipt and expenditure of Opioid Funds for no less than five(5) years and shall make such records available for review by any other Participating Local Government or OAC, or the public. Records requested by the public shall be produced in accordance with Washington's Public Records Act RCW 42.56.001 et seq. Records requested by another Participating Local Government or an OAC shall be produced within twenty-one(21)days of the date the record request was received. This requirement does not supplant any Participating Local Government or OAC's obligations under Washington's Public Records Act RCW 42.56.001 et seq. D. Payment of Counsel and Litigation Expenses 1. The Litigating Local Governments have incurred attorneys' fees and litigation expenses relating to their prosecution of claims against the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants, and this prosecution has inured to the benefit of all Participating Local Governments. Accordingly, a Washington 8 Government Fee Fund("GFF")shall be established that ensures that all Parties that receive Opioid Funds contribute to the payment of fees and expenses incurred to prosecute the claims against the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants, regardless of whether they are litigating or non-litigating entities. 2. The amount of the GFF shall be based as follows: the funds to be deposited in the GFF shall be equal to 15%of the total cash value of the Opioid Funds. 3. The maximum percentage of any contingency fee agreement permitted for compensation shall be 15% of the portion of the Opioid Funds allocated to the Litigating Local Government that is a party to the contingency fee agreement,plus expenses attributable to that Litigating Local Government.Under no circumstances may counsel collect more for its work on behalf of a Litigating Local Government than it would under its contingency agreement with that Litigating Local Government. 4. Payments from the GFF shall be overseen by a committee(the "Opioid Fee and Expense Committee") consisting of one representative of the following law firms: (a)Keller Rohrback L.LP.; (b)Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP; (c)Goldfarb&Huck Roth Riojas, PLLC; and(d)Napoli Shkolnik PLLC. The role of the Opioid Fee and Expense Committee shall be limited to ensuring that the GFF is administered in accordance with this Section. 5. In the event that settling Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Participants do not pay the fees and expenses of the Participating Local Governments directly at the time settlement is achieved,payments to counsel for Participating Local Governments shall be made from the GFF over not more than three years,with 50%paid within 12 months of the date of Settlement and 25%paid in each subsequent year, or at the time the total Settlement amount is paid to the Trustee by the Defendants, whichever is sooner. 6. Any funds remaining in the GFF in excess of: (i)the amounts needed to cover Litigating Local Governments'private counsel's representation agreements, and(ii)the amounts needed to cover the common benefit tax discussed in Section C.8 below(if not paid directly by the Defendants in connection with future settlement(s), shall revert to the Participating Local Governments pro rata according to the percentages set forth in Exhibits B,to be used for Approved Purposes as set forth herein and in Exhibit A. 7. In the event that funds in the GFF are not sufficient to pay all fees and expenses owed under this Section,payments to counsel for all Litigating Local Governments shall be reduced on a pro rata basis. The Litigating Local Governments will not be responsible for any of these reduced amounts. 9 8. The Parties anticipate that any Opioid Funds they receive will be subject to a common benefit"tax"imposed by the court in In Re:National Prescription Opiate Litigation,United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Case No. 1:17-md-02804-DAP("Common Benefit Tax"). If this occurs, the Participating Local Governments shall first seek to have the settling defendants pay the Common Benefit Tax. If the settling defendants do not agree to pay the Common Benefit Tax,then the Common Benefit Tax shall be paid from the Opioid Funds and by both litigating and non-litigating Local Governments. This payment shall occur prior to allocation and distribution of funds to the Participating Local Governments. In the event that GFF is not fully exhausted to pay the Litigating Local Governments' private counsel's representation agreements, excess funds in the GFF shall be applied to pay the Common Benefit Tax(if any). E. General Terms 1. If any Participating Local Government believes another Participating Local Government,not including the Regional Abatement Advisory Councils, violated the terms of this MOU,the alleging Participating Local Government may seek to enforce the terms of this MOU in the court in which any applicable Settlement(s)was entered,provided the alleging Participating Local Government first provides the alleged offending Participating Local Government notice of the alleged violation(s)and a reasonable opportunity to cure the alleged violation(s). In such an enforcement action, any alleging Participating Local Government or alleged offending Participating Local Government may be represented by their respective public entity in accordance with Washington law. 2. Nothing in this MOU shall be interpreted to waive the right of any Participating Local Government to seek judicial relief for conduct occurring outside the scope of this MOU that violates any Washington law. In such an action, the alleged offending Participating Local Government, including the Regional Abatement Advisory Councils, may be represented by their respective public entities in accordance with Washington law. In the event of a conflict,any Participating Local Government, including the Regional Abatement Advisory Councils and its Members, may seek outside representation to defend itself against such an action. 3. Venue for any legal action related to this MOU shall be in the court in which the Participating Local Government is located or in accordance with the court rules on venue in that jurisdiction. This provision is not intended to expand the court rules on venue. 4. This MOU may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original,but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. The Participating Local Governments approve the use of electronic signatures for execution of this MOU. All use of electronic signatures 10 shall be governed by the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. The Parties agree not to deny the legal effect or enforceability of the MOU solely because it is in electronic form or because an electronic record was used in its formation. The Participating Local Government agree not to object to the admissibility of the MOU in the form of an electronic record, or a paper copy of an electronic document, or a paper copy of a document bearing an electronic signature, on the grounds that it is an electronic record or electronic signature or that it is not in its original form or is not an original. 5. Each Participating Local Government represents that all procedures necessary to authorize such Participating Local Government's execution of this MOU have been performed and that the person signing for such Party has been authorized to execute the MOU. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank—Signature Pages Follow] 11 This One Washington Memorandum of Understanding Between Washington Municipalities is signed this day of , 2022 by: Name & Title On behalf of 4894-0031-1574,v.2 12 EXHIBIT A OPIOID ABATEMENT STRATEGIES 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Expand availability of treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including all forms of Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2. Support and reimburse services that include the full American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) continuum of care for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including but not limited to: a. Medication-Assisted Treatment(MAT); b. Abstinence-based treatment; c. Treatment, recovery, or other services provided by states, subdivisions, community health centers; non-for-profit providers; or for-profit providers; d. Treatment by providers that focus on OUD treatment as well as treatment by providers that offer OUD treatment along with treatment for other SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction; or e. Evidence-informed residential services programs, as noted below. 3. Expand telehealth to increase access to treatment for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, 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, evidence-informed, or promising practices such as adequate methadone dosing. 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction and for persons who have experienced an opioid overdose. 6. Support treatment of mental health trauma resulting from the traumatic experiences of the opioid user(e.g., violence, sexual assault, human trafficking, or adverse childhood experiences) and family members (e.g., surviving family members after an overdose 1 or overdose fatality), and training of health care personnel to identify and address such trauma. 7. Support detoxification (detox) and withdrawal management services for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including medical detox, referral to treatment, or connections to other services or supports. 8. Support training on MAT for health care providers, 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 10. Provide fellowships for addiction medicine specialists for direct patient care, instructors, and clinical research for treatments. 11. 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. 12. Support the dissemination 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. 13. Support the development and dissemination of 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 treatment for and recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Provide the full continuum of care of recovery services for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including supportive housing, residential treatment, medical detox services, peer support services and counseling, community navigators, case management, and connections to community-based services. 2. 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 2 3. Provide access to housing for people with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including supportive housing, recovery housing, housing assistance programs, or training for housing providers. 4. Provide community support services, including social and legal services, to assist in deinstitutionalizing persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co- usage, and/or co-addiction. 5. 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 6. Provide employment training or educational services for persons in treatment for or recovery from OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co- addiction. 7. 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. 8. 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 manage the opioid user in the family. 9. Provide training and development of procedures for government staff to appropriately interact and provide social and other services to current and recovering opioid users, including reducing stigma. 10. Support stigma reduction efforts regarding treatment and support for persons with OUD, including reducing the stigma on effective treatment. 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction through evidence- based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 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. Support Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment(SBIRT)programs to reduce the transition from use to disorders. 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. 3 4. Purchase automated versions of SBIRT and support ongoing costs of the technology. 5. Support training for emergency room personnel treating opioid overdose patients on post-discharge planning, including community referrals for MAT, recovery case management or support services. 6. Support hospital programs that transition persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, or persons who have experienced an opioid overdose, into community treatment or recovery services through a bridge clinic or similar approach. 7. Support crisis stabilization centers that serve as an alternative to hospital emergency departments for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co- usage, and/or co-addiction or persons that have experienced an opioid overdose. 8. 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. 9. 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction or to persons who have experienced an opioid overdose. 10. Provide funding for peer navigators, recovery coaches, care coordinators, or care managers that offer assistance to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction or to persons who have experienced on opioid overdose. 11. 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. 12. Develop and support best practices on addressing OUD in the workplace. 13. Support assistance programs for health care providers with OUD. 14. Engage non-profits and the faith community as a system to support outreach for treatment. 15. 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 16. Create or support intake and call centers to facilitate education and access to treatment, prevention, and recovery services for persons with OUD and any co- occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 4 17. Develop or support a National Treatment Availability Clearinghouse — a multistate/nationally accessible database whereby health care providers can list locations for currently available in-patient and out-patient OUD treatment services that are accessible on a real-time basis by persons who seek treatment. D. ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF CRIMINAL-JUSTICE-INVOLVED PERSONS Address the needs of persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co- usage, and/or co-addiction who are involved — or are at risk of becoming involved — in the criminal justice system through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Support pre-arrest or post-arrest diversion and deflection strategies for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including established strategies such as: a. Self-referral strategies such as the Angel Programs or the Police Assisted Addiction Recovery Initiative(PAARI); b. Active outreach strategies such as the Drug Abuse Response Team (DART) model; c. "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; d. Officer prevention strategies, such as the Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion (LEAD) model; e. Officer intervention strategies such as the Leon County, Florida Adult Civil Citation Network or the Chicago Westside Narcotics Diversion to Treatment Initiative; f. Co-responder and/or alternative responder models to address OUD-related 911 calls with greater SUD expertise and to reduce perceived barriers associated with law enforcement 911 responses; or g. County prosecution diversion programs, including diversion officer salary, only for counties with a population of 50,000 or less. Any diversion services in matters involving opioids must include drug testing, monitoring, or treatment. 2. Support pre-trial services that connect individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction to evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, and related services. 3. Support treatment and recovery courts for persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, but only if these courts provide referrals to evidence-informed treatment, including MAT. 5 4. Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction who are incarcerated in jail or prison. 5. Provide evidence-informed treatment, including MAT, recovery support, or other appropriate services to individuals with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction who are leaving jail or prison 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction to law enforcement, correctional, or judicial personnel or to providers of treatment, recovery, 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, and the needs of their families, including babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome, through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Support evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, and other measures to educate and provide support to families affected by Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome. 2. Provide training for obstetricians or other healthcare personnel that work with pregnant women and their families regarding treatment of OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 3. 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 Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome get referred to appropriate services and receive a plan of safe care. 4. 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. 6 5. Offer enhanced family supports and home-based wrap-around services to persons with OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, including but not limited to parent skills training. 6. 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, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include,but are not limited to, the following: 1. Training for health care providers regarding safe and responsible opioid prescribing, dosing, and tapering patients off opioids. 2. Academic counter-detailing to educate prescribers on appropriate opioid prescribing. 3. Continuing Medical Education(CME) on appropriate prescribing of opioids. 4. Support for non-opioid pain treatment alternatives, including training providers to offer or refer to multi-modal, evidence-informed treatment of pain. 5. Support enhancements or improvements to Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs), including but not limited to improvements that: a. Increase the number of prescribers using PDMPs; b. Improve point-of-care decision-making by increasing the quantity, quality, or format of data available to prescribers using PDMPs or by improving the interface that prescribers use to access PDMP data, or both; or c. 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. 6. Development and implementation of a national PDMP — Fund development of a multistate/national PDMP that permits information sharing while providing appropriate safeguards on sharing of private health information, including but not limited to: a. Integration of PDMP data with electronic health records, overdose episodes, and decision support tools for health care providers relating to OUD. 7 b. Ensuring PDMPs incorporate available overdose/naloxone deployment data, including the United States Department of Transportation's Emergency Medical Technician overdose database. 7. Increase electronic prescribing to prevent diversion or forgery. 8. Educate Dispensers on appropriate opioid dispensing. G. PREVENT MISUSE OF OPIOIDS Support efforts to discourage or prevent misuse of opioids through evidence-based, evidence- informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Corrective advertising or affirmative public education campaigns based on evidence. 2. Public education relating to drug disposal. 3. Drug take-back disposal or destruction programs. 4. Fund community anti-drug coalitions that engage in drug prevention efforts. 5. Support 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). 6. Engage non-profits and faith-based communities as systems to support prevention. 7. Support evidence-informed school and community education programs and campaigns for students, families, school employees, school athletic programs, parent- teacher and student associations, and others. 8. 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. 9. Support community-based education or intervention services for families, youth, and adolescents at risk for OUD and any co-occurring SUD/MH conditions, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 10. 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. 11. Support greater access to mental health services and supports for young people, including services and supports provided by school nurses or other school staff, to 8 address mental health needs in young people that (when not properly addressed) increase the risk of opioid or other drug misuse. H. PREVENT OVERDOSE DEATHS AND OTHER HARMS Support efforts to prevent or reduce overdose deaths or other opioid-related harms through evidence-based, evidence-informed, or promising programs or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Increase availability and distribution of naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, opioid users, families and friends of opioid users, schools, community navigators and outreach workers, drug offenders upon release from jail/prison, or other members of the general public. 2. Provision by public health entities of free naloxone to anyone in the community, including but not limited to provision of intra-nasal naloxone in settings where other options are not available or allowed. 3. Training and education regarding naloxone and other drugs that treat overdoses for first responders, overdose patients, patients taking opioids, families, schools, and other members of the general public. 4. Enable school nurses and other school staff to respond to opioid overdoses, and provide them with naloxone, training, and support. 5. Expand, improve, or develop data tracking software and applications for overdoses/naloxone revivals. 6. Public education relating to emergency responses to overdoses. 7. Public education relating to immunity and Good Samaritan laws. 8. Educate first responders regarding the existence and operation of immunity and Good Samaritan laws. 9. Expand access to testing and treatment for infectious diseases such as HIV and Hepatitis C resulting from intravenous opioid use. 10. Support mobile units that offer or provide referrals to 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 11. Provide training in treatment and recovery 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction. 12. Support screening for fentanyl in routine clinical toxicology testing. 9 PART THREE: OTHER STRATEGIES I. FIRST RESPONDERS In addition to items C8, D1 through D7, H1, H3, and H8, support the following: 1. Current and future law enforcement expenditures relating to the opioid epidemic. 2. Educate law enforcement or other first responders regarding appropriate practices and precautions when dealing with fentanyl or other drugs. J. LEADERSHIP, PLANNING AND COORDINATION Support efforts to provide leadership, planning, and coordination to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Community regional planning to identify goals for reducing harms related to the opioid epidemic, to identify areas and populations with the greatest needs for treatment intervention services, or to support other strategies to abate the opioid epidemic described in this opioid abatement strategy list. 2. A government dashboard to track key opioid-related indicators and supports as identified through collaborative 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, 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 in various items above, support training to abate the opioid epidemic through activities, programs, or strategies that may include, but are not limited to, the following: 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. Invest in 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, co-usage, and/or co-addiction, or implement other 10 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, 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. 4. Research on innovative supply-side enforcement efforts such as improved detection of mail-based delivery of synthetic opioids. 5. 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). 6. Research on expanded modalities such as prescription methadone that can expand access to MAT. 11 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Adams County Adams County 0.1638732475% Hatton Lind Othello Ritzville Washtucna County Total: 0.1638732475% Asotin County Asotin County 0.4694498386% Asotin Clarkston County Total: 0.4694498386% Benton County Benton County 1.4848831892% Benton City Kennewick 0.5415650564% Prosser Richland 0.4756779517% West Richland 0.0459360490% County Total: 2.5480622463% Chelan County Chelan County 0.7434914485% Cashmere Chelan Entiat Leavenworth Wenatchee 0.2968333494% County Total: 1.0403247979% Clallam County Clallam County 1.3076983401% Forks Port Angeles 0.4598370527% Sequim County Total: 1.7675353928% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-1 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Clark County Clark County 4.5149775326% Battle Ground 0.1384729857% Camas 0.2691592724% La Center Ridgefield Vancouver 1.7306605325% Washougal 0.1279328220% Woodland*** Yacolt County Total: 6.7812031452% Columbia County Columbia County 0.0561699537% Dayton Starbuck County Total: 0.0561699537% Cowlitz County Cowlitz County 1.7226945990% Castle Rock Ka la ma Kelso 0.1331145270% Longview 0.6162736905% Woodland*** County Total: 2.4720828165% Douglas County Douglas County 0.3932175175% Bridgeport Coulee Dam*** East Wenatchee 0.0799810865% Mansfield Rock Island Waterville County Total: 0.4731986040% Ferry County Ferry County 0.1153487994% Republic County Total: 0.1153487994% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-2 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Franklin County Franklin County 0.3361237144% Connell Kahlotus Mesa Pasco 0.4278056066% County Total: 0.7639293210% Garfield County Garfield County 0.0321982209% Pomeroy County Total: 0.0321982209% Grant County Grant County 0.9932572167% Coulee City Coulee Dam*** Electric City Ephrata George Grand Coulee Hartline Krupp Mattawa Moses Lake 0.2078293909% Quincy Royal City Soap Lake Warden Wilson Creek County Total: 1.2010866076% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-3 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Grays Harbor County Grays Harbor County 0.9992429138% Aberdeen 0.2491525333% Cosmopolis Elma Hoquiam McCleary Montesano Oakville Ocean Shores Westport County Total: 1.2483954471% Island County Island County 0.6820422610% Coupeville Langley Oak Harbor 0.2511550431% County Total: 0.9331973041% Jefferson County Jefferson County 0.4417137380% Port Townsend County Total: 0.4417137380% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-4 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation King County King County 13.9743722662% Algona Auburn*** 0.2622774917% Beaux Arts Village Bellevue 1.1300592573% Black Diamond Bothell*** 0.1821602716% Burien 0.0270962921% Carnation Clyde Hill Covington 0.0118134406% Des Moines 0.1179764526% Duvall Enumclaw*** 0.0537768326% Federal Way 0.3061452240% Hunts Point Issaquah 0.1876240107% Kenmore 0.0204441024% Kent 0.5377397676% Kirkland 0.5453525246% Lake Forest Park 0.0525439124% Maple Valley 0.0093761587% Medina Mercer Island 0.1751797481% Milton*** Newcastle 0.0033117880% Normandy Park North Bend Pacific*** Redmond 0.4839486007% Renton 0.7652626920% Sammamish 0.0224369090% SeaTac 0.1481551278% Seattle 6.6032403816% Shoreline 0.0435834-5-01% Skykomish Snoqualmie 0.0649164481% Tukwila 0.3032205739% Woodinville 0.0185516364% Yarrow Point County Total: 26.0505653608% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-5 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Kitsap County Kitsap County 2.6294133668% Bainbridge Island 0.1364686014% Bremerton 0.6193374389% Port Orchard 0.1009497162% Poulsbo 0.0773748246% County Total: 3.5635439479% Kittitas County Kittitas County 0.3855704683% Cle Elum Ellensburg 0.0955824915% Kittitas Roslyn South Cle Elum County Total: 0.4811529598% Klickitat County Klickitat County 0.2211673457% Bingen Goldendale White Salmon County Total: 0.2211673457% Lewis County Lewis County 1.0777377479% Centralia 0.1909990353% Chehalis Morton Mossyrock Napavine Pe Ell Toledo Vader Winlock County Total: 1.2687367832% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-6 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Lincoln County Lincoln County 0.1712669645% Almira Creston Davenport Harrington Odessa Reardan Sprague Wilbur County Total: 0.1712669645% Mason County Mason County 0.8089918012% Shelton 0.1239179888% County Total: 0.9329097900% Okanogan County Okanogan County 0.6145043345% Brewster Conconully Coulee Dam*** Elmer City Nespelem Okanogan Omak Oroville Pateros Riverside Tonasket Twisp Winthrop County Total: 0.6145043345% Pacific County Pacific County 0.4895416466% Ilwaco Long Beach Raymond South Bend County Total: 0.4895416466% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-7 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Pend Oreille County Pend Oreille County 0.2566374940% Cusick lone Metaline Metaline Falls Newport County Total: 0.2566374940% Pierce County Pierce County 7.2310164020% Auburn*** 0.0628522112% Bonney Lake 0.1190773864% Buckley Carbonado DuPont Eatonville Edgewood 0.0048016791% Enumclaw*** 0.0000000000% Fife 0.1955185481% Fircrest Gig Harbor 0.0859963345% Lakewood 0.5253640894% Milton*** Orting Pacific*** Puyallup 0.3845704814% Roy Ruston South Prairie Steilacoo_m Sumner 0.1083157569% Tacoma 3.2816374617% University Place 0.0353733363% Wilkeson County Total: 12.0345236870% San Juan County San Juan County 0.2101495171% Friday Harbor County Total: 0.2101495171% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-8 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Skagit County Skagit County 1.0526023961% Anacortes 0.1774962906% Burlington 0.1146861661% Concrete Hamilton La Conner Lyman Mount Vernon 0.2801063665% Sedro-Woolley 0.0661146351% County Total: 1.6910058544% Skamania County Skamania County 0.1631931925% North Bonneville Stevenson County Total: 0.1631931925% Snohomish County Snohomish_County 6.9054415622% Arlington 0.2620524080% Bothell*** 0.2654558588% _Brier Darrington Edmonds 0.3058936009% Everett 1.9258363241% Gold Bar Granite Falls Index Lake Stevens 0.1385202891% Lynnwood 0.7704629214% Marysville 0.3945067827% Mill Creek 0.1227939546% Monroe 0.1771621898% Mountlake Terrace 0.2108935805% Mukilteo 0.2561790702% Snohomish 0.0861097964% Stanwood Sultan Woodway County Total: 11.8213083387% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-9 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Spokane County Spokane County 5.5623859292% Airway Heights Cheney 0.1238454349% Deer Park Fairfield Latah Liberty Lake 0.0389636519% Medical Lake Millwood__-__._-- --- Rockford Spangle Spokane 3.0872078287% Spokane Valley 0.0684217500% Waverly County Total: 8.8808245947% Stevens County Stevens County 0.7479240179% Chewelah Colville Kettle Falls Marcus Northport Springdale County Total: 0.7479240179% Thurston County Thurston County 2.3258492094% Bucoda Lacey 0.2348627221% Olympia 0.6039423385% Rainier Tenino Tumwater 0.2065982350% Yelm County Total: 3.3712525050% Wahkiakum County Wahkiakum County 0.0596582197% Cathiamet County Total: 0.0596582197% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-10 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Walla Walla County Walla Walla County 0.5543870294% College Place Prescott Waitsburg Walla Walla 0.3140768654% County Total: 0.8684638948% Whatcom County Whatcom County 1.3452637306% Bellingham 0.8978614577% Blaine Everson _ Ferndale 0.0646101891% Lynden 0.0827115612% Nooksack Sumas County Total: 2.3904469386% Whitman County Whitman County 0.2626805837% Albion Colfax Colton Endicott Farmington Garfield LaCrosse Lamont Malden Oakesdale Palouse Pullman 0.2214837491% Rosalia St.John Tekoa Uniontown County Total: 0.4841643328% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-11 EXHIBIT B Local County Government %Allocation Yakima County Yakima County 1.9388392959% Grandview 0.0530606109% Granger Harrah Mabton Moxee Naches Selah Sunnyside 0.1213478384% Tieton Toppenish Union Gap Wapato Yakima 0.6060410539% Zillah County Total: 2.7192887991% *** - Local Government appears in multiple counties B-12 Exhibit C KING COUNTY REGIONAL AGREEMENT King County intends to explore coordination with its cities and towns to facilitate a Regional Agreement for Opioid Fund allocation. Should some cities and towns choose not to participate in a Regional Agreement, this shall not preclude coordinated allocation for programs and services between the County and those cities and towns who elect to pursue a Regional Agreement. As contemplated in C.5 of the MOU, any Regional Agreement shall comply with the terms of the MOU and any Settlement. If no Regional Agreement is achieved, the default methodology for allocation in C.4 of the MOU shall apply.