CITY NEEDS A NEW APPROACH TO ADDICTION

BALTIMORE'S ZONING BOARD sought in 1959 to close two homes for
alcoholics operated by the Flynn Christian Fellowship Houses on
grounds that rehabilitation homes did not belong in residential areas.
This sparked a controversy that the City Council resolved three years
later by requiring that such homes receive council approval before
opening in residential areas.

Baltimore is wrestling with this issue again, but in a very different
context. The region's substance abuse addiction problem now includes
heroin and cocaine as well as alcohol, and drug treatment is widely
recognized as effective and essential to the future of the Baltimore
region.

And the legal landscape has changed fundamentally. Court rulings on
the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act make
clear that Baltimore's 1962 solution is now illegal. These laws state
that people recovering from drug addiction are protected from
discrimination because of their disability. Yet Baltimore's ordinance
process specifically singles out this group.

The council is now considering two pieces of legislation, introduced
by Mayor Martin O'Malley's administration, to make the city's zoning
code comply with federal law. If the council fails to act, the courts
are almost certain to impose a solution.

We believe there is a new way of operating that would be better than
expensive litigation that the city is bound to lose. The council needs
to reform the zoning code to bring Baltimore's zoning standards into
compliance with the law. But these reforms should be part of a broader
strategy to deal with the question that the city wrestled with in
1959: How do you meet the need for treatment in a way that strengthens
communities? Here's how:

* Organizations such as Baltimore Substance Abuse Systems
(BSAS), the quasi-public entity under the city Health Department that
funds virtually all city treatment programs, must insist that
treatment programs act as "good neighbors" - making themselves known
in the community, communicating openly with residents and
participating in community efforts to improve the quality of life.

* BSAS should share its research with the public and invite
comment about the placement of treatment facilities to ensure they
are in locations that address demonstrated needs.

* The mayor's Office of Neighborhoods should act as a one-stop
shop, coordinating effective city agency responses to complaints
about unlicensed group homes that are not funded by BSAS. These
homes, which are not publicly regulated or funded, are not affected
by the proposed zoning reforms. But they are subject to the same laws
that govern other residences.

* The city and state should develop sources of funding and
standards for unlicensed group homes. Many of these recovery homes
don't have licenses because they don't provide clinical treatment or
have clinical staff, but they do provide invaluable services that
deserve public support and are community assets. Others are
overcrowded and provide very limited support for residents.

How might these four steps be better for communities and for the
city?

Drug addiction has devastated neighborhoods for 40 years while there
has been too little treatment to stem the damage. Treatment programs
often have tried to operate under the radar in their communities,
largely because providers feared communities would stigmatize programs
and their participants.

Programs have found locations wherever they could, not necessarily as
part of a larger strategy to rationalize or improve the treatment
system. Once established, programs have often remained isolated from
the communities where they are situated. So the tremendous positive
energy that comes from the recovery process has not connected with
community efforts to improve the quality of life.

This new way could mean that more drug treatment programs would be
active and involve community residents. Communities would gain a
partner in addressing a range of community issues, including the
addiction that lies at the heart of many problems. The treatment
system could evolve into a rational plan to match treatment
availability with need in the community.

And those in recovery, who often feel a powerful desire to give back
to the communities that have been hurt by their addiction, would be
connected to and welcomed by communities as part of the recovery process.

Changed times and changed laws mean that Baltimore must take a new
approach to this old issue. After 40 years, let's figure out how to
make it work for everybody.

Michael Sarbanes is executive director of the Citizens Planning and
Housing Association. Carlos Hardy is its drug treatment director.