CLEVELAND, Ohio — Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost on Friday continued to push a proposal for how to use any money the state could receive as part of any opioid settlements, despite facing criticism by local government leaders for what they see as an ill-timed and power-hungry move.

But Yost said in an interview with cleveland.com that he is open to other ideas in addition to the proposed constitutional amendment, which would direct some or even all opioid settlement money to a nonprofit foundation for treatment of addiction and and other related programs statewide.

“If somebody’s got a better idea, I’m for their idea,” Yost said. “I am not wedded to this.”

Yost’s plan was outlined in a memo written by a member of his administration at his request. And on Friday, he said the plan is the best so far to ensure the money is not used for not unrelated issues, as was money from the Big Tobacco settlement in the late 1990s.

He also disputed accusations that his plan was a maneuver for power.

“There’s no pot of money that’s going to the Attorney General’s Office,” he said. “I don’t see how this could be a power grab. And actually, the governor doesn’t get any extra power under this thing.

“This is actually a protection for local governments to make sure that the state's promises will come true and be honored into future years.”

The proposed amendment would pool money obtained through any mass settlements with drug companies and provide strict guidelines on how the money could be used. Yost said he is open to what percentage of the settlement money would be set aside in this way.

The cash would be used to create a nonprofit “Ohio State and Local Government Opioid Crisis Recovery Foundation” to distribute settlement money among 19 regions around the state. A portion of the money would be invested.

State and municipal representatives, as well as lawmakers and experts, would oversee the pool of money, which could total well into the millions. The foundation would operate on a permanent basis, though Ohio voters would vote every 20 years on whether to continue it.

The idea of a nonprofit has been discussed during meetings between his office and attorneys for local governments, people involved in the meetings said. A rift had formed in recent months over the fate of lawsuits accusing drug companies of fueling an epidemic that saw thousands of people die of prescription painkiller overdoses. Thousands of lawsuits have been filed nationwide, and the discussions were prompted by a desire for Ohio to be ready if and when drug companies reach a settlement to resolve all the lawsuits nationwide.

Local governments, which are mostly litigating their cases in federal courts, bristled at several previous legal and legislative attempts by Yost, who sued drug companies in state courts, to wrest control over their lawsuits. While Yost has argued that he should be able to speak for all Ohioans, the local governments and their lawyers had portrayed his tactics as a power grab by someone they cannot trust to use the money properly.

Yost’s latest idea was no different, they said, adding that their feelings were exacerbated because a proposed constitutional amendment was not discussed at earlier meetings.

“We thought this issue was behind us,” Bill Mason, the chief of staff for Cuyahoga County Executive Armond Budish, said Friday. He said local governments, not the state, are in the best position to know how opioid settlement money should be spent.

Yost acknowledged that the amendment proposal was not discussed at the meetings. He said that his office has recently reached out to representatives of local governments. He declined to name them but said “we’ve gotten good results.”

Leaders from Cuyahoga and Summit counties, two of the state’s largest counties, made clear their dislike his proposal.

Greta Johnson, assistant chief of staff for Summit County Executive Ilene Shapiro, called Yost’s idea a “credit grab” and added that it was disappointing that the amendment “wasn’t shared with people who are trying to do good work on behalf of all Ohioans.”

Yost said the proposal remains a work in progress.

The timetable is a fast one. In order to get a proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot for the next election in March, both houses of the Ohio legislature will have to give its approval before Dec. 18, the last day a measure can be given to the Secretary of State’s Office.

The attorney general said the need for quick action is motivated by what he sees as the potential for a large settlement with drug companies ahead of an opioid trial set to take place next month in state court in New York. Drug companies have settled lawsuits, including ones filed by Cuyahoga and Summit counties. The counties have reached agreements worth more than $300 million.

However, with the exception of OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma, no drug company has an agreement to resolve all the cases it faces nationwide. Yost things that may change next month.

“It's a great big state,” he said. “And I don't know that the industry is going to be able to continue to play piece by piece and try to buy their way out of the New York litigation.”

Still, that could present a significant challenge. A spokesman for Gov. Mike DeWine said Yost’s proposal feels “premature,” as the discussions between state and local government representatives are ongoing.

A spokeswoman for House Speaker Larry Householder said in an email Friday that “this is not an issue that we have discussed with our caucus.”

Yost still thinks something can be done.

“It’s an awful tight timeframe, but I think we can, we may be able to get there,” he said. “I’m optimistic.”

Columbus bureau reporter Jeremy Pelzer contributed to this story.

Read more:

AG Dave Yost’s office’s new plan to divvy up potential opioid money met with skepticism from Gov. Mike DeWine

Gov. Mike DeWine, seeking to ease tensions in opioid litigation, holds talks at mansion with AG Yost, local leaders

Cuyahoga, Summit counties received millions of dollars through opioid litigation. See the breakdown of the settlements.

Here’s where opioid litigation stands after Cuyahoga, Summit counties reach $260 million settlement

Cuyahoga County outlines plan for $23M in opioid settlement money

Summit County to create task force to decide how to spend settlement money from opioid lawsuit