CONTINUE DRUG COURT: A WORTHY INVESTMENT

It was shortsighted and irresponsible of the state Legislature to not
adequately fund Drug Court, a broad-minded and needed program that is
struggling financially in counties like Citrus.

But just because the high-profile politicos in Tallahassee missed another
opportunity to invest money in the short-term in order to reap great
savings over the long run, doesn't mean the County Commission should follow
suit.

That's why the commission, as its staff prepares the operating budget for
coming fiscal year, should dedicate enough money to the Drug Court program
to ensure it remains solvent.

Drug court provides meaningful treatment to drug-addicted defendants who
commit non-violent crimes. It is a progressive alternative to sending drug
users to jail, which is much more expensive and where there is little or no
effort to rehabilitate them. The program attacks the core of drug-related
crime instead of just treating the symptom of lawbreaking by imposing jail
terms.

Since the mid-1980s, when legislators began writing laws to punish drug
users more severely, taxpayers have footed the increasingly high bill for
incarceration. Those laws created a ripple effect that grew into a tidal
wave when well-intentioned, but imprudent lawmakers established mandatory
sentencing guidelines. By effectively tying the hands of judges who mete
out the punishment, legislators have had to spend more and more to build
prisons to warehouse inmates, many of whom would not have broken the law
had it not been for their drug addictions.

Drug Court is an inventive outgrowth of that dilemma. It began in 1989 when
Janet Reno was Dade County's State Attorney. Since then, successful
programs have sprouted up in many other Florida counties, including Citrus,
and nearby Marion, Hillsborough and Pinellas. (Hernando County is expected
to establish its first Drug Court this summer.) In counties where the
program has been in place for some time, the recidivism rate for
non-violent, drug-using criminals has decreased dramatically, and taxpayers
have saved money by not having to pay the much higher costs of imprisoning
the defendant.

Other savings to taxpayers are not as easy to track, but clearly exist. A
drug-using defendant who can stay out of jail by entering Drug Court can
continue to work and make a living for his family while he undergoes
counseling, appears in court once a week and undergoes frequent urine drug
tests to verify his sobriety.

And, in a larger sense, the entire community benefits when substance
abusers reclaim their lives, cutting down on drug-related crimes, such as
burglary, assault, vandalism and automobile accidents.

Patricia Thomas, administrative judge in Citrus County, has shepherded the
program through its first full year and understands that the key to making
this alternative to jail a success is to deal harshly with those who throw
away their opportunity to reform. Those who fail to meet their commitments
to stay off drugs and receive counseling during the 18-month program are
sent to jail.

Drug Court received seed money last year through a $30,000 federal grant,
and the County Commission supplemented that with a $25,000 allocation. But
the administrator of the program, Raymond Cox, applied for six grants this
year and did not get one. Then, the Legislature dashed Cox's hope of
getting some money from the State Court Administrator's Office when it cut
that agency's budget request.

That means if Drug Court continues, it will be up to the County Commission
to pay for it, at least for one more year. It's a worthwhile investment,
and we strongly urge the commission to show wisdom and responsibility where
the Legislature did not.

Clear-thinking people know that treatment and prevention are the most
effective weapons to combat drug use. The tough-on-crime crowd must accept
that reality and support funding for programs such as Drug Court, instead
of buying mortar and bricks to build more prisons, where non-violent drug
offenders are stockpiled to learn from more accomplished felons.