Pubdate: Wed, 27 Jun 2001
Source: Associated Press (Wire)
Section: State and Regional
Copyright: 2001 Associated Press
Author: Don Thompson, Associated Press Writer

COUNTIES GRADED ON PLANS TO IMPLEMENT SWEEPING DRUG TREATMENT INITIATIVE

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - California's 58 counties are lined up to implement a 
sweeping drug treatment initiative Sunday - but they're all pointing in 
different directions.

A survey of the 11 most populous counties showed a wide variation in the 
money the counties will devote to treatment and the range of treatment 
options they will provide as they comply with Proposition 36.

The voter-approved initiative will send nonviolent first- and second-time 
drug offenders to treatment instead of prison or jail starting July 1.

But the Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy Foundation review released Wednesday 
criticized some counties for relying more heavily on probation officers 
than on treatment providers to oversee offenders. It panned counties 
including Santa Clara, Sacramento and San Bernardino for diverting too much 
money from treatment programs.

"They want to completely remove the courts and probation and law 
enforcement from the equation," said David Wert, a spokesman for San 
Bernardino County, which received the worst grade.

The nonprofit drug policy reform organization also gave poor grades to 
counties it said aren't providing methadone treatment for heroin addicts. 
However, San Diego County officials said the center's review is flawed 
because they will indeed provide methadone treatment to combat a heroin 
overdose problem second only to San Francisco's.

The organization graded the 11 counties, which together encompass 75 
percent of the state's population, on four areas based on the 
implementation plans the counties submitted last month: the money they're 
spending on treatment versus the money going for probation or other 
supervision; the number and variety of treatment options; the split in 
reliance on law enforcement versus treatment professionals; and the amount 
of community involvement in the counties' planning.

San Francisco, which has an existing policy favoring treatment over 
incarceration was awarded the highest grade, an "A." Yolo County Public 
Defender Barry Melton, who sits on his statewide association's Proposition 
36 oversight committee, credited San Francisco County District Attorney, 
Terence Hallinan for his progressive attitude.

San Mateo was awarded an "A-". Prija Haji, a member of the county's 
Proposition 36 task force, said the county is offering "a whole continuum 
of treatment options," and has seen strong support from probation officers 
there.

Alameda and Orange counties received "Bs", Los Angeles a "B-", Fresno and 
Riverside counties were given "Cs," Santa Clara and San Diego counties a 
"D+", and Sacramento (D). San Bernardino County came in last with a failing 
grade.

Sacramento and San Bernardino counties were criticized for devoting too 
much of their share of state-allocated Proposition 36 money to probation 
supervision instead of treatment. Sacramento will use 54 percent for 
treatment and 46 percent for probation, while San Bernardino will use 57 
percent for treatment and 43 percent for treatment.

"The strongest predictor if whether they got a good grade or not was 
money," said Glenn Backes, the center's national director of Health and 
Harm Reduction. "The money's been put in the wrong place."

However, Sacramento County Supervisor Roger Dickinson said much of the 
probation money will be related to treatment.

"They see money going to probation and think it's more of the same old 
thing," Dickinson said. "It wouldn't be the more traditional 'I'm from the 
Probation Department and I'm here keeping tabs on you."'

The Lindesmith Center was a key backer of the initiative adopted by 61 
percent of voters in the November election. Its report cards amount to "an 
arbitrary ranking" based on what it feels counties' funding and treatment 
priorities should be, said Bob Mimura, executive director of Los Angeles 
County's Criminal Justice Coordination Committee.

San Francisco, Orange, Los Angeles and Riverside counties were given "extra 
credit" because their district attorneys publicly disclosed how they intend 
to charge drug offenders, which will determine whether they are eligible 
for treatment under the voter initiative.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth