Muncie City Council meeting leaves residents confused after state money used on public safety

MUNCIE, Ind. — Residents in Muncie were left confused and angry after a city council meeting on Monday. The reasoning? It’s how the city is using funds supplied by the state for opioid prevention.

“Sixty-eight percent of the funds have to go towards abatement,” says Dan Ridenour, mayor of Muncie. “They told us what accounts to set up inside our system and it said opioid abatement. And that goes towards serving the people who are dealing with that situation.”

The city was awarded just over $1.1 million to help prevent opioid use in Muncie. The mayor said it is a restricted amount that the city must use towards that. They also received an unrestricted portion, just over $500,000, which can be used towards anything the city chooses to spend it on.

“Out of that settlement, the state also provided cities and counties with funds that are unrestricted,” explained Mayor Ridenour. “They know that every city doesn’t have the same challenges and there may be areas cities need to use it for other areas. What we did is we are using those funds to help fund public safety for this particular year.”

In a 5 to 4 vote on Monday, the council approved the use of the unrestricted funding. That came after a long debate and testimony from some residents who wanted the money for prevention and recovery. There was also talk of tabling this to discuss on another day, but a majority voted to not table it and come to a decision on Monday.

The four councilors who opposed the plan were not able to speak on Wednesday. They sent a joint statement saying, in part, “We need to use every dollar in the most effective way possible to prevent and break the cycles of addiction within our community.”

The councilors said they also felt pressured to pass the proposal or else fear public safety funding may suffer.

“Our public safety employees shouldn’t be put in a position where they must ‘fight’ for the money they’ve been promised and have earned. The community shouldn’t be put in the position where they must ‘fight’ for funding for addiction prevention and treatment programs,” the joint statement said.

Ridenour denies trying to force a decision and said he gave the council plenty of time to think about the proposal. The mayor does agree with them on one point: They need to do everything they can to stop the opioid crisis.

“We’re very committed here in Muncie, from the mayor’s office, to help people get through that situation,” Ridenour said.

The mayor said they have not yet spent any of the money towards public safety, but will do so soon.

The four councilors who dissented were Harold Mason, Nora Powell, William McIntosh and Sara Guillion.

Read their entire statement below:

The City Council unanimously adopted the police and fire contracts at our March meeting. Those contracts included a 5% raise for 2025. Ord 7-25 was an additional appropriation ordinance up for adoption at the April Council meeting. The ordinance requested $526K be transferred from the Opioid Settlement Fund and used for salaries. The four of us voted no. Why?

We were elected to represent and advocate for the interests of residents in Muncie and to the overwhelming feedback we’ve received, from not only the people in our districts but from across the city, was that they hoped the Administration would seek other sources of funding to pay for the public safety raises and allow the Opioid Settlement Funds to be used for preventative measures to combat Muncie’s drug crisis. Even though the settlement money is distributed over several years, the Opioid Settlement is a one-time thing. It’s not likely to happen again; we need to use every dollar in the most effective way possible to prevent and break the cycles of addiction within our community.

What made Monday night’s vote incredibly difficult was, unbeknownst to most of Council, the Administration had negotiated the 2025 raises contingent on using the balance of the unrestricted Opioid Settlement Funds to cover the cost of the contracts. No appropriation meant no raises. Council was made aware of this crucial piece of information immediately before the vote. Additionally, the Deputy Controller, Matt Wagley, informed Council that if Ord 7-25 was not adopted Muncie would not have sufficient revenue to fund the negotiated contracts which may push Mayor Ridenour to declare an “economic emergency” and nullify contracts.

Our public safety employees shouldn’t be put in a position where they must ‘fight’ for the money they’ve been promised and have earned. The community shouldn’t be put in the position where they must ‘fight’ for funding for addiction prevention and treatment programs, especially when the funds in question are a direct result of a legal settlement awarded because of drug-related tragedies. Because of this lack of transparency, the Administration created a situation where Council was forced to choose between two very deserving recipients; public safety and addiction services.

A motion to table the ordinance to explore other funding options for the raises was defeated. Only myself, councilors Gullion, McIntosh and Powell voted in favor to table. We support our public safety employees. We voted to adopt their contract in March and we are happy they’ll get the raises they’ve earned, but ultimately, we felt that we must listen to the overwhelming feedback of those we represent and vote no.

The final vote on Ord 7-25 had the same outcome of 4-5 in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
Harold Mason President Dist 6; Nora Powell Dist 2; William McIntosh at-Large; Sara Guillion Dist 4