Program credited with saving drug users faces cuts
Jane Frazee of Guerneville appeared in Sonoma Superior Court Tuesday after graduating from a six-month drug and alcohol rehabilitation program.
JOHN BURGESS/THE PRESS DEMOCRATPublished: Tuesday, August 4, 2009 at 5:32 p.m.
Last Modified: Tuesday, August 4, 2009 at 5:32 p.m.
Getting busted for drugs was one of the best things that ever happened to Jane Frazee.
Instead of going to jail, the addict of more than 30 years was placed in a treatment program for people convicted of non-violent possession charges that she says helped her kick a $100-a-day crystal meth habit and probably saved her life.
Now, the 48-year-old Guerneville woman said she is gainfully employed and buying a house. And she’s no longer a drag on the system, which costs taxpayers millions of dollars a year.
“It was an awesome experience that changed my life,” said Frazee as she waited outside the Sonoma County courthouse Tuesday to report her progress to a judge. “They gave me the tools to get clean and stay that way.”
But changes are coming to the program established by California voters nine years ago requiring first- and second-time drug offenders to receive treatment rather than jail time.
Lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger have cut Proposition 36 funding nearly in half, forcing counties to drastically reduce their rehabilitation offering and creating long waiting lists for court-ordered treatment.
In Sonoma County, where about 500 people are eligible each year, the cut could mean some first-time offenders get little or no treatment at all, said Gino Giannavola, director of drug and alcohol programs for the Department of Health Services.
Giannavola has been in talks with judges, prosecutors and public defenders to decide how to handle an expected $800,000 cut in a budget of $1.6 million.
Already, he said would-be patients wait weeks to get into residential and outpatient treatment programs such as Turning Point and California Human Development.
“We know that some people will get cut loose,” Giannavola said. “They might just walk away. It’s going to get real dicey.”
District Attorney Stephan Passalacqua said the situation could threaten public safety because offenders will be free while they await treatment.
Although those eligible have been convicted of simple possession, about 80 percent of the cases involve methamphetamine, he said.
The law is clear that they will receive treatment instead of incarcertation, Passalacqua said.
“There will be fewer options for judges to handle situations where someone comes in front of them with serious addiction problems,” Passalacqua said. “That person is going to be back in the community, waiting to get in (to the program). It does pose a potential public safety risk.”
Proposition 36 was approved by 61 percent of voters, creating the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000.
It requires those convicted of possession or transportation of drugs to undergo treatment rather than jail. Eligible offenders can get up to a year of drug treatment and six months of additional care. Those who don’t cooperate can be punished with incarceration.
A UCLA study noted that for every dollar spent on Proposition 36 rehab programs, the state would save between $2.50 and $4 in potential jail costs.
The program was funded with an initial $60 million statewide and shot to a high of $145 million in 2007. But it has since dropped considerably, falling to about $108 million last year.
Under the budget Schwarzenegger signed into law last month, funding was slashed to $18 million. State officials expect to transfer $45 million in federal stimulus money to the program, but that would still leave a 42 percent reduction over last year.
“The law says you have to send people for treatment, not jail,” said John Abrahams, the county’s chief public defender. “That law is still on the books. What’s going to happen is there will be longer waits. The treatment will be shorter than it was before and maybe less effective. In some cases there may not be anything available.”
Presiding Judge Gary Nadler said the law was another unfunded mandate for local government to absorb.
But he said no one would go without treatment. The issue will be how much and when, he said.
“There is still a lot we can do but not nearly enough,” Nadler said.
Non-profits that contract with Sonoma County for servcies said the reduction will mean even fewer beds in residential treatment centers and more emphasis on outpatient care.
Michael Spielman, executive director of Drug Abuse Alternatives Center, said some programs such as those treating pregnant addicts and heroin users could be eliminated.
He said outpatient care might not be sufficient for the most serious cases, where people need to be separated from peers and under close supervision for up to three months.
“I would expect more incarcertion, more crime,” he said. “It’s not smart.”
Recovering drug users agreed.
Emalee Wagy, 27 of Healdsburg, said she wouldn’t have been able to get off meth if it weren’t for Proposition 36, which put her through a six-month program through California Human Development.
She struggled with her addiction for three years before she was arrested for possession of hashish late last year. On Tuesday, she held a certificate of completion which she planned to show the “12/10 court” judge - so named by the penal code section.
“I’ve been sober 123 days today,” Wagy said between puffs of a cigarette. “I wouldn’t be here without this program.”
All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.
Comments are currently unavailable on this article