Bill
HB 2929
Authorizes DHS-run pilot overdose prevention sites with staffing, safety services, drug checking, and care referrals; grants immunity to participants and hosts to reduce overdoses.
Status snapshot
- Introduced: Feb 6–18, 2025 (filed by Rep. La Shawn K. Ford). Multiple House amendments filed (Mar–Apr 2025). Placed on General State Calendar (May 13, 2025). Companion: SB 2818. Several co‑sponsors added. Fiscal, home‑rule, housing affordability and racial impact notes requested.
- Current form: amends the State’s Substance Use Disorder Act to authorize pilot overdose prevention sites (OPSs), require DHS to study OPSs, and set staffing, service, location and legal‑immunity provisions. Effective immediately (per synopsis).
Purpose and intent
- Respond to a rising overdose crisis (including fentanyl‑contaminated supply) by creating state‑sanctioned, evidence‑based harm reduction pilot programs (OPSs) to reduce fatal overdoses, infectious disease transmission, public drug use, and to link people who use drugs to treatment and social supports.
Key provisions
- Research and Reporting
- Department of Human Services (DHS) must create a mechanism to collect OPS research/data and deliver a report to the General Assembly within 12 months of the act’s effective date. The report must cover OPS effectiveness, best practices (staffing, placement, activities), and benefits/challenges of various OPS models.
- Pilot Program Authority and Scope
- DHS, in collaboration with people with lived experience, shall develop a pilot service (subject to available funding) that includes at least one OPS (amendments adjust exact phrasing/number and DHS approval authority).
- DHS may approve entities (community‑based organizations, hospitals, clinics, health centers, etc.) to operate pilot OPSs and set minimum standards for participant safety, compliance and monitoring.
- OPS Core Services and Features (minimum)
- Hygienic supervised space to consume pre‑obtained substances.
- On‑site naloxone and oxygen and staff trained to monitor and respond to overdoses/first aid.
- Sterile injection and other safer use supplies; safe disposal of used syringes; safer smoking/snorting kits.
- Drug‑checking/fentanyl test strips; education on safer consumption and syringe disposal.
- Referrals to substance use disorder treatment, medication‑assisted treatment, mental health care, housing and other supports.
- Provision of a quiet/safe supervised space for recovery after use.
- Staffing and Participation
- Minimum staffing must include trained peers with lived experience; peers should make up a majority of staff. Medical and behavioral health professionals trained in overdose response must also be part of teams.
- DHS may not bar persons with criminal records from frontline, management, or executive roles in OPS operations.
- Location and Prioritization
- Pilot OPSs to be placed in high‑need areas based on DHS public‑health overdose data, as natural extensions of existing harm reduction/outreach programs. The bill text prioritizes areas with high rates of fatal and non‑fatal overdoses (some language refers to Chicago/high‑population jurisdictions in amendments).
- Legal Protections / Immunity
- The bill provides criminal and civil immunity to participants using OPS services, OPS staff, and property owners hosting an OPS (amendments refine the immunity language — e.g., persons present at OPSs shall not be arrested/charged/prosecuted for possession of certain controlled substances while at the OPS).
- Other provisions
- Public awareness/outreach, data/reporting requirements for pilot sites, home‑rule exemption language, and authority for DHS to develop standards and approvals. Funding is subject to availability.
Who is affected
- Primary: people who use drugs (especially those at high risk of public or solitary use), peers and outreach workers, community‑based service providers, hospitals/clinics that might host or collaborate with OPSs.
- Secondary: DHS/other state agencies (data collection and oversight), local governments, law enforcement, property owners (who may receive immunity), and communities where pilot OPSs operate.
Potential impacts and considerations
- Intended public‑health benefits: reduce fatal overdoses, rapid emergency response to overdoses, fewer public injections and discarded syringes, greater linkage to treatment and social supports.
- Implementation issues: funding availability, selection/approval of operating entities, local siting decisions, workforce development (peer training), integrations with existing local services, and managing community concerns.
- Legal/policy considerations: interaction with state controlled‑substances law and federal law (immunity is state‑level); home‑rule implications (a home‑rule note was requested).
Notes and caveats
- The bill text in the legislative file contains multiple floor and committee amendments and some truncated passages. Specific numeric limits, exact immunity scope, and location restrictions were revised across amendments; final operational details depend on the adopted amendment language and any further changes as the bill advances.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
