CALIFORNIA DRUG-TREATMENT PROGRAM GETS MIXED REVIEWS

Proposition 36 Not Unlike Ballot Issue Ohioans Could Decide In November

FAIRFIELD, Calif. -- One year after taking effect, California's
controversial program substituting treatment for jail seems to be helping
some drug offenders.

In the state's five largest counties, the voter-approved initiative --
called Proposition 36 -- has resulted in nearly 12,600 nonviolent drug
offenders being diverted to community-based treatment, with seven in 10
sticking to it.

The state's prison population is shrinking, and taxpayer savings are
expected to total $150 million or more annually, mostly due to reduced
incarceration costs.

"There are thousands and thousands of people who are not in jail who
otherwise would have been," said Bill Zimmerman, head of the Campaign for
New Drug Policies, the group that backed the proposal.

"Some of these people have gotten their lives back together . . . People
who were jailbirds or indigents are now working, paying taxes, taking care
of their families, taking care of their health-care needs."

In Ohio, voters may soon be deciding a Proposition 36-like proposal.

The $120 million-a-year California program, in place since July 1, 2001, is
not without problems or detractors.

Most of those in treatment are older -- 35 to 45 -- with a long history of
drug abuse, including multiple previous drug offenses. Thus, the program
could potentially cost the state's 58 counties more for treatment than
anticipated.

Generally, opponents see the program as little more than a slap on the
wrist for those engaged in illegal drug activity.

"It remains a dangerous experiment," said Larry G. Brown, executive
director of the California District Attorneys Association. "This is not
about first- and second-time offenders. This is about drug legalization."

On Wednesday in Ohio, supporters of a similar treatment-instead-of-
incarceration measure are expected to file a petition containing hundreds
of thousands of signatures. To qualify for the ballot, at least 335,422 of
the signatures -- 10 percent of the voters who voted for governor in the
last statewide gubernatorial election -- must be validated as those of
registered voters.

If the issue makes the ballot, it will probably generate the most-
contentious fight in the fall election, topping even the governor's race
between Republican Gov. Bob Taft and Democrat Timothy F. Hagan.

Ohio's proposal differs from Propositon 36 in at least two crucial ways:

The California initiative changed state law, not the state constitution.
Ohio's is a proposed constitutional amendment.

Ohio judges would be limited to sending treatment no-shows, dropouts and
failures to jail for 90 days. California judges can re-sentence offenders
to their original jail sentence, sometimes a year or longer. Neither
California's law nor Ohio's proposal limits help for drug offenders to
those with one or two offenses. Offenders receive two chances once they
enter the program but are allowed to have had any number of drug offenses
before entering it.

Proposition 36 effectively wipes the slate clean in terms of qualifying for
treatment but does not expunge criminal records. Ohio's proposal would do
much the same.

Despite the lure of saving money at a time of severe state budget cuts,
Gov. Taft vehemently opposes the Ohio measure, labeling it flawed, a
revolving door for drug offenders, a hindrance to the state's drug courts
and inappropriate for Ohio's Constitution. Prosecutors, judges, treatment
providers and many other organizations recruited by Ohioans Against Unsafe
Drug Laws agree with the governor.

Hagan said he supports the proposal in theory, but is troubled because it
would involve a constitutional change.

On the other side is a powerful trio of wealthy businessmen: George Soros,
a billionaire international philanthropist; Peter B. Lewis, chairman of
Cleveland-based Progressive Insurance; and John G. Sperling, founder of the
University of Phoenix. In the past seven years, the three have have used
their deep pockets to fund a national crusade to reform drug laws, backing
19 ballot issues in 11 states -- and winning 17 times.

They are expected to contribute at least $3 million for the Ohio crusade.

Similar issues are likely to make the November ballots in Michigan and the
District of Columbia.

Adjusting to the change

In California, even die-hard supporters acknowledge that the program isn't
for everyone.

It didn't work for Rocky Rodriquez.

In a Solono County courtroom recently, the 22-year-old Fairfield resident
was lectured by Commissioner Raymond C. Wieser Jr. after testing positive
for cocaine and alcohol, violating his probation and missing mandatory
treatment meetings.

"Mr. Rodriquez, I think we need to find something other than Prop. 36 for you."

Wieser meant jail.

His decision triggered a reaction from Laurie Berliner, Rodriquez's public
defender attorney.

"I feel this law is being subverted," she said.

"I am not wild about it, but I'm stuck with this law," shot back Patty
Strickland, deputy district attorney.

A similar scene has played out in courtrooms throughout California.

During the past 12 months, judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and
prison, probation and treatment officials have worked to adjust to the
biggest change in state law since "three strikes and you're out" -- which
mandates a life sentence for people who commit three serious felonies.

Toni J. Moore, head of the alcohol- and drug-treatment program for
Sacramento County, views the new law as positive but challenging.

Moore's agency has encountered "an older crowd" of Proposition 36 clients,
in their 30s and 40s. Two-thirds have previous felony convictions -- some
three or more -- and most started using drugs as teen-agers.

Sacramento County had 1,488 such offenders in the first year, with 77
percent receiving treatment. The county's annual share of the state's
budget for the program is $4.2 million.

"I would say it's going very well," Moore said. "It's still relatively new.
We had little bumps along the way. What's going really well is the
collaboration and team approach."

While program procedures vary among counties, offenders usually remain in
the program about a year. They are required to undergo treatment --
sometimes on an inpatient basis -- from providers certified by the state,
attend Alcoholics or Narcotics Anonymous meetings, report regularly to a
probation officer, submit to random drug tests, and return to court for
periodic "checkups." Literacy training and family counseling also can be
part of the mix.

In California, as in most other states, drug offenders have been cycling in
and out of the legal system for decades.

"Society's solution for them has been a failure," Zimmerman said. "They are
not any better for having been jailed 20 times. They need to get out of
that revolving door."

"The doors are open in every county in California," said Del Sayles- Owen,
deputy director of the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs
and the state's point person in charge of implementing the program.

Sayles-Owen won't say whether she thinks the program is working as intended
by California voters.

"Not enough time has elapsed to determine if people are successful or not,"
she said.

The state's first-year report will be issued in about a month.

Because the initial batch of offenders involves more-serious cases than
anticipated, Sayles-Owen said, the state is hurriedly adding residential
treatment beds and assessing whether more money will be needed.

Evaluating the program

California's political establishment lined up against the issue two years
ago, generating some unlikely alliances.

Along with many Republicans across the state, Democratic Gov. Gray Davis
opposed the measure, albeit in low-key fashion.

And Actor Martin Sheen of West Wing fame -- a noted liberal activist and
recovering alcoholic whose son Charlie has had well-publicized drug
problems -- served as a spokesman for opponents, appearing in the only TV
commercials they could afford during the campaign.

"My heart breaks for drug addicts and their families, but Proposition 36
won't help them," Sheen said. "Proposition 36 essentially decriminalizes
hard drugs like heroin, PCP, crack cocaine, even date rape drugs."

Brown, a former deputy district attorney in Ventura County, led the
opposition and remains its sharpest critic.

"The jury is still out on the impact of Proposition 36," he said. "We've
tried to make the best of a bad situation. It's the law.

"The most critical lesson people in Ohio could learn from the California
experience is to look at the fine print."

Michael Meredith, vice president and clinical director of PharmaTox, a
Fairfield treatment provider, calls the program "an overwhelming victory"
for much-needed changes in drug laws.

Meredith, a recovering cocaine addict, once owned a thriving construction
company -- until his drug use consumed him.

"I lost it all," he said.

He then went to back to school, earned a psychology degree, taught at two
colleges and founded PharmaTox 12 years ago. Meredith's company has many
Proposition 36 clients.

"It has introduced the reality of true treatment to the criminal- justice
system," he said. "We've got to get our heads out of the sand and put
treatment out front. This is by no means legalization."

Dewey Dempsey, director of the East Bay Community Recovery Project in
Hayward, south of Oakland, predicted that such program would do well in Ohio.

"If I were there, I'd be lobbying for it," he said. "I've seen people do
their time, get out of prison, and the first thing they do when they get
out is go find their drug of choice. That's what they are planning the
whole time they're in prison."

(SIDEBAR)

A year after implementation

California's first-year report on Proposition 36 is due for release next
month. Here are some general facts related to the program's first 12 months:

The treatment-instead-of-jail program is operating in all 58 counties.

About 12,600 offenders have been referred to the program from the state's
five largest counties, with 71 percent remaining in treatment.

In Sacramento County, two-thirds of the participants are 35 or older; most
have multiple previous drug offenses; nearly three-fourths are male; half
are white; most are poor, unemployed and have had mental problems in
addition to drug dependency.

Sources: Drug Policy Alliance Report, Sacramento County Alcohol and Drug
Services Division