Pubdate: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Copyright: 2001 San Jose Mercury News Contact: http://www.sjmercury.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/390 Author: Michael D. Nevin Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/prop36.htm (Proposition 36) DAVIS CUTS TOO MUCH FROM DRUG TREATMENT SPENDING GOV. Gray Davis' May revision of the budget released last week proposed significant cuts in the area of alcohol and drug services. Several of the items are headed for conference this week. Last November, voters passed Proposition 36 by 61 percent. They overwhelmingly supported treatment rather than incarceration for drug possession offenders. The governor now proposes to cut existing substance abuse treatment services for both adults and youth. The justification for this action is that new Proposition 36 funds are available to pay for treatment, but this argument ignores the fact that the language of the proposition explicitly declares that its funds must supplement, not supplant, existing services. The cuts in youth treatment services seem particularly inappropriate. The modest award we received for youth this fiscal year was a first-time award and recently allocated to support youth programming in San Mateo County. The funds would be removed within the first year, leaving a woefully under-funded youth substance abuse treatment system. Reductions in alcohol and drug abuse treatment will cost law enforcement. The proposed budget cuts drug court in half. This cut is proposed despite overwhelming evidence of the effectiveness of drug courts. San Mateo County was just provided with an increased treatment award for drug court, only to now face a cut. Proposition 36 funds were provided to treat specific individuals starting July 1. The complications of Proposition 36 implementation will be made worse by these cuts in other services. Most budget cuts in the May revision are reductions in original budget augmentations or use of reserves. The cuts in the area of alcohol and drug services are real and deep and very disproportionate. In the last three years, San Mateo County has significantly reduced the waiting list and waiting time, and has increased capacity to provide substance abuse treatment. The effective drug court program is keeping substance abusers out of jail. We urge that the state Department of Alcohol programs be funded at the January level. The cuts would harm adult services, drug court, and youth treatment in San Mateo County. Michael D. Nevin President, San Mateo County Board of Supervisors - --- MAP posted-by: GD