DRUG ADDICTION FUELS MURDEROUS TREND

Poor treatment plan: Townsend, Schmoke must end stalemate over how to stem
abuse.

First of two parts

THE NUMBERS are appalling: An estimated 60,000 Baltimore residents -- one of
eight adults -- are addicted to drugs, many simultaneously abusing heroin,
cocaine and marijuana. The surrounding counties are believed to have 60,000
more addicts.

Out of these numbers flows a river of misery: Last year, police say, drugs
were involved in more than 75 percent of the 314 slayings that made
Baltimore one of America's most murderous cities. Drug dependence spawns
other criminal activity, from break-ins and holdups to prostitution and
panhandling. About 85 percent of suspects in pretrial incarceration have a
drug habit.

"This is the biggest problem in the city," says Health Commissioner Peter
Beilenson. "If we really want to address the economy and crime, we have to
address treatment."

Some progress has been made. Drug courts, which sentence offenders to
treatment rather than to prison, have become common. On June 1, city
probation officers were given unprecedented rights to monitor judges'
treatment orders. Without having to go back to court, they can apply an
escalating scale of sanctions, culminating with jail time, against an
offender who fails drug tests.

Under Mayor Kurt L. Schmoke, drug treatment spending has doubled to $33
million a year from $16.5 million in 1996. Yet leaders cannot agree on the
most effective use of these funds.

Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, who heads a statewide task force on drug
treatment and has emphasized criminal justice in discussing a run for
governor in 2002, thinks most available funds should be used to wean
lawbreakers from addiction. "You've got the stick of prison time to get
people into treatment," she explains.

Mr. Schmoke prefers a voluntary approach. "I view the addicts more as
patients to be treated than persons to be incarcerated. I want to get to
them before they get into the criminal justice system."

This dispute has impaired state-city cooperation. While government grants
have so far been unaffected, such a visible rift about philosophy and
spending priorities could cost the city needed drug-treatment dollars.

It is already hampering efforts to raise private matching funds for
foundation grants to increase drug treatment in the city.

The dispute between Ms. Townsend and Mr. Schmoke is perplexing because the
two officials agree on so many other things. Both see treatment as
preferable to locking up addicts; both share a liberal Democratic outlook on
social policy. Yet strong convictions, ambition and turf protection,
combined with a shifting national drug policy, have prevented them from
harmoniously pursuing a goal they share -- combating drug victimization.

Mr. Schmoke, who will end his 12-year tenure as mayor in December,
established his credentials as a drug reformer soon after arriving at City
Hall. In 1988, he proposed a national debate on drug decriminalization. In
1993, when that effort failed to materialize, he asked President Clinton, a
longtime personal friend, for $30 million to launch a national pilot program
in Baltimore to treat all addicted people wanting help. The city did not get
the money.

The idea of using the city as a model cropped up again three years later. It
was recommended to Lieutenant Governor Townsend by a task force financed by
the White House's drug policy office. That panel, the Washington/Baltimore
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA), strongly criticized the city
and recommended that it give treatment priority to criminal offenders.
"Reducing recidivism of chronic hard-core offenders means less criminal
activity," the report said, referring to the prevalence of addiction among
lawbreakers. "It also means safer streets and higher quality of life for
Baltimore City residents."

HIDTA is one of 21 regional anti-drug task forces overseen by retired Gen.
Barry R. McCaffrey, the White House drug czar. Its territory spans Northern
Virginia to Baltimore and its suburbs.

While all other task forces have concentrated on providing law enforcement
the tools to fight a more effective drug war, the Beltsville-based
Washington/Baltimore HIDTA has taken advantage of the Clinton
administration's recent interest in medical alternatives and advocates
mandatory treatment for criminals.

The group's studies trumpet the success of its approach. A recent survey
tracking 1,216 offenders contends "quality treatment with supervision"
reduced the probability of rearrest by 50 percent.

One of the authors of the study -- and of many previous ones -- is Faye
Taxman, a top HIDTA official who is also Ms. Townsend's chief scientific
adviser on drug addiction. Her overlapping roles have established the
University of Maryland research professor as a powerful behind-the-scenes
figure. Ms. Taxman, who has a Ph.D. in criminology, is controversial, not
least because of her readiness to render opinions on medical issues.

The region's biggest jurisdictions have embraced HIDTA's mission -- except
Baltimore. Out of the 8,000 city-controlled drug treatment slots, the
Schmoke administration has agreed to reserve only 1,215 slots -- or 15.6
percent -- exclusively for court-ordered treatment. The Circuit Court says
it alone needs 5,000 slots to run treatment sentencing properly.

City-state cooperation is further hindered by the refusal of Baltimore
Substance Abuse Systems Inc., which manages the city's drug treatment
budget, to join a central information system run by the University of
Maryland, even though treatment providers commonly complain about the
absence of a patient tracking mechanism.

This squabbling has to end. Baltimore must have drug treatment machinery
that can effectively deal with the medical and criminal consequences of the
addiction curse.

Since February, Sun editorials have detailed how endless turf fights and
finger-pointing have paralyzed Baltimore's criminal justice system, clogging
courts, crowding detention centers and frustrating efforts to bring down the
city's unacceptably high number of homicides.

The most effective way to reduce both court backlogs and crime is to further
increase the number of courts where addicts are sentenced to treatment
rather than prison. But drug courts cannot be used to their full potential
without adequate treatment slots. This cannot be achieved if various levels
of governments keep feuding.

If the new probation program for addicted offenders is to work, Baltimore
will need far more slots for court-ordered treatment. Mayor Schmoke and
other decision-makers should make that happen, recognizing that many of the
city's biggest problems are a result of addiction among repeat offenders.
They should campaign for more treatment options in the metropolitan area. A
regional approach is essential: Addicts often cross jurisdictional lines to
seek treatment. For that reason alone, BSAS's refusal to participate in the
state's computer network is inexcusable.