BILL TO REVISE PROPOSITION 36 UNDER FIRE

Jail Proposed For Refusal To Comply With Treatment

LOS ANGELES - Oliver Hamilton says he wasn't afraid of jail: He was
afraid of change.

Two years ago, the San Diego Navy veteran overcame his fears and his
36-year drug and alcohol addiction with the help of Proposition 36,
the ballot measure requiring treatment instead of prison for
nonviolent drug offenders.

Today, the 49-year-old warehouse manager is fighting a bill that the
governor plans to sign this week that rewrites the initiative. It
would allow judges to impose short-term jail sentences for
recalcitrant drug offenders who refuse to comply with their
court-ordered treatment.

"Really, no addict is afraid of jail," Hamilton said. "Put them in
inpatient programs. That's what works."

But treatment hasn't worked for three out of four of the first- and
second-time drug offenders sentenced to recovery programs under
Proposition 36 since it went into effect July 1, 2001.

They never showed up for their court-ordered programs or they dropped
out of the programs.

So a task force of prosecutors, public defenders, judges and treatment
professionals proposed the short-term jail sentences and other changes
in the initiative in hopes of getting more addicts into treatment and
off drugs.

Lawmakers adopted the revisions last week in Senate Bill 1137. Now
Proposition 36's authors are planning to sue the state.

"It would reverse the intent of Prop. 36," said Margaret Dooley, Drug
Policy Alliance Proposition 36 outreach director. "It would take Prop.
36 from (mandating) treatment instead of incarceration, and make it
(require) treatment and incarceration."

California Public Defenders Association President Barry Melton called
the Drug Policy Alliance's views "absurd."

He said drug offenders go to prison now on the "installment plan"
because the ones who don't complete treatment usually end up behind
bars.

"This bill is calculated to keep people out of jail," Melton
said.

Under SB 1137, judges could impose jail sentences of two to 10 days
for relapses or failure to show up for treatment.

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Stephen Manley was chairman of
the task force that rewrote Proposition 36, and he said he pushed for
the jail sanctions as a "fast wake-up call" for addicts.

"If you give them a quick wake-up call, you will see they will get
into treatment," he said. "And, even more importantly, they will stay
in treatment."

Melton said the public defenders agreed to the jail sanctions in
exchange for other provisions that would give their clients more
chances to turn their lives around.

Under Proposition 36, for instance, their clients went to jail after
the third drug-related probation violation.

SB 1137 would lift that threshold and give the judge the power to
continue an offender's treatment after a third violation, if the judge
believes that the defendant would benefit.

SB 1137 would also increase the amount of treatment time, from 18
months to 24 months of drug rehabilitation and follow-up care.

In addition, judges could keep offenders who commit non-drug
misdemeanors, such as shoplifting, in the program but sentence them to
up to 30 days in jail. Under Proposition 36, judges usually revoked
offenders' probation, ending their eligibility for drug treatment.

"We had clients disqualified all of the time for driving on suspended
licenses ... and for other minor misdemeanors," Melton said.

Sen. Denise Ducheny, D-San Diego, said she sought to give judges more
discretion to deal with cases on an "individual basis" when she wrote
SB 1137.

By giving the judges more discretion, she said she is making
Proposition 36 operate more like the drug courts that predated the
initiative's approval.

Drug courts get higher marks among many lawmakers and those in law
enforcement because drug court judges can exert more control over drug
offenders, and a 2005 state study indicated that they had a higher
success rate than Proposition 36.

Proposition 36 authors say more people graduate from drug court
programs because the judges select which defendants qualify.
Proposition 36 programs are open to all drug offenders who qualify.

A UCLA study found that Proposition 36 saved $2.50 in prison and other
costs for every $1 spent on the program. The savings grew to $4 for
every $1 spent when researchers only considered those who finished
their court-ordered programs.

"Addicts on the street right now communicate with one another, and
they know the message now is you don't really have to comply," said
Kathy Jett, Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs director.
Proposition 36 "will be taken much more seriously now."

She said the threat of jail would give treatment providers another
"tool" to use in persuading an addict to stay in a program.

She also said judges and treatment programs already present trophies,
gift certificates and other rewards for completing treatment. They
also order intensified treatment, court observation and other
sanctions for relapses and missed treatment sessions.

"Jail sanctions don't work alone," said Marta Bortner, Health and
Human Services Agency spokeswoman. "They only work as part of a
comprehensive treatment plan."