A new report to direct the state how to spend over $46 million secured from opioid manufacturers and distributors will highlight ongoing dissent between several members of the Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board and New York agencies overseeing the work.

Members of the Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board voted Monday to approve its third annual report after a fiery argument between members and agency leaders at a meeting in Albany to keep funding flowing. 

But several board members blasted officials from the state Office of Addiction Services & Supports, the state Health Department and state Budget Division on Monday for withholding county-level data they have long requested — arguing the intentional lack of transparency makes the group's recommendations to reduce substance abuse and overdose deaths less effective. 

"How are we to make recommendations when we don't have the information to make the recommendations?" board member Tracie Gardner asked state officials Monday.

The final report, due by Nov. 1 each year, includes dozens of recommendations for the state to address the opioid epidemic, including prevention, treatment, harm reduction services, recovery, workforce support, health needs and more.

Several board members initially hesitated to approve the report, which will be edited and released by Friday. They continue to demand granular data from state agencies about nonfatal overdoses, suicides, people with co-occurring disorders and more. 

Office of Addiction Services & Supports Commissioner Dr. Chinazo Cunningham told Spectrum News 1 the state department has multiple online dashboards with overdose and funding data which should be sufficient.

"There's been competing priorities," she said Monday. "Should they focus on the recommendations, or should they focus on data presentations? 

"It's not a surprise, you know, that some people have different priorities over another, but that's also why we vote, right?" the commissioner added.

The board has debated the third set of recommendations for weeks, including addressing a lack of bilingual services, workforce development and more funding for local organizations and staff to target communities with higher rates of overdose.

Members of the public at Monday's meeting expressed their frustrations with the process, too, including those with children who died from an overdose.

"You are doling out the blood money of our children," said Alexis Pleus, founder of Truth Pharm, an organization that focuses on harm reduction strategies to fight substance abuse. "Your ineptness, coupled with state agencies' inability to work together, will lead to death. There will be blood on your hands and that is your legacy."

The final document will have an added statement showing the board's dissent over the data and how several members want the process to be changed going forward. 

The exact wording will be finalized before Friday's submission to Gov. Kathy Hochul and members of the Legislature.

Last month, members of the board urged Gov. Hochul to declare a public health emergency as New Yorkers die of opioid overdoses at historic levels.

Overdose deaths are on the decline in most parts of the state, but not everywhere. Several communities, especially in poor urban and rural neighborhoods, continue to see elevated rates of substance abuse and related overdose deaths.

The state has made more than $366 million in opioid settlement funds available to communities to date, which Cunningham said New York has done faster than other U.S. states. She said the board's debate represents a healthy, and necessary, part of the conversation.

"It's really about for us to just work with them, to understand what their priorities are and then, you know, help make that happen," she said.

Overall, the board agreed transparency issues with the state shouldn't obstruct the group's greater mission: Moving money out the door to save lives.

State leaders have disagreed with the board's recommendations in the past, but amid the current epidemic, time is of the essence.

"We've got to go forward, even if it means that we have to make some compromise in the short-term," board member Dr. Lawrence Brown said.