California CapitolWeek transcript
4/20/01
((Jack))
Thanks for
joining us.
Treatment,
not prison . . . .it’s the new way of dealing with first and second time,
non-violent drug offenders in California.
((Melissa))
Proposition
36, re-defines California’s approach to the war on drugs . . .
looking at drug abuse more as a medical and health matter, rather than a criminal
justice problem.
((Jack))
Joining
us today are state and local officials .
. . as well as people within the criminal justice system who will address
the issues surrounding this major shift in policy.
((Melissa))
Jack, we’ll
hear from them in a moment.
But first
. . . . trying to go from number one in putting drug users in prison . . .
to number one in drug treatment is a difficult challenge.
Michael
Isip has this report.
Prop 36—Is it working?
((Johnnie Lewis, Founder
of SISTER)
It’s a supportive, intensive program system of treatment, empowerment,
and recovery.
Or “SISTER” for short.
This Oakland program is saving lives.
It targets women who are homeless, in prison, or who have been abused.
They all have long histories of drug addiction…
((Johnnie Lewis, Founder
of SISTER)
We just start working with them in terms of finding out how
they got to the point of being on drugs and alcohol, helping them to explore
that, and then showing them ways of healing.
((Ann Lewis, Recovering
Drug Addict))
I was still just using, was just out there without a life.
No where to go, homeless, sleeping here, sleeping there, prostituting,
doing unnecessary things to get some drugs.
These women are lucky.
They’re on the road back, but there are not enough treatment centers,
let alone effective ones like Johnnie’s, and that’s the biggest challenge
facing Prop 36, which could funnel as many as 36,000 drug offenders to treatment
a year…
((Johnnie Lewis, Founder
of SISTER))
Well, I’m full, and I have a waiting, and there are other facilities
such as mine that are full and have waiting lists. Where are you going to go?
Effective July 1st,
Prop 36 will send most non-violent offenders through probation and treatment
instead of prison. That includes parole
violators who commit non-violent possession offenses. All eligible offenders must receive up to one year of treatment
and up to six months of follow-up care…
((Gretchen Burns Bergman,
Mother of Two Addicts))
Punitive incarceration does not work, and more than that, it
damages human beings. I’m a mother
of two sons, and they’re both in their twenties, and I love them very much,
but they’re both drug addicts.
Gretchen’s sons started
abusing drugs when they were thirteen. The
older one ended up in prison where, she said, it was easier to feed their
addiction…
((Gretchen Burns Bergman,
Mother of Two Addicts))
When they’re in their addiction, it’s easier to go back to
jail because they know they can use their drugs when they’re in their disease,
but they’re not afraid of homelessness, they’re not afraid of jail, they’re
not really even afraid of death.
((Lori Koster, San Diego
Drug Court Coordinator))
Proposition 36 is dangerous because the disease of addiction
is based on failure to be held accountable for their behavior.
Lori Koster heads San
Diego’s drug court. There are about
one hundred in California. Participation
involves sanctions, drug testing, and frequent court appearances. Elements she believes are needed to break the
cycle of addiction…
((Lori Koster, San Diego
Drug Court Coordinator))
They think about their life in custody, and they think about,
“Is this the life I want, or do I want to go the drug treatment route and
get clean and sober?”
((Dan Carson, State Legislative
Analyst’s Office))
Well, I think this is the most significant state correctional
policy change we’ve seen since the enactment of the “3 Strikes and Your Out”
law.
A report from the independent,
non-partisan Legislative Analyst listed the challenges of Prop 36, from the
collaboration between state and local agencies, to delivery of services, to
supervision…
((Dan Carson, State Legislative
Analyst’s Office))
It’ll be a number of years before we get it all working the
way every one would like it to be.
((Johnnie Lewis, Founder
of SISTER))
There are people that just call on the telephone, and they
get put on the list in the order that they call, so they’re also competing
with people who will never be arrested. I’m
not going to say that it won’t work because it’s here now, we’ve got to make
it work.
I’m Michael Isip for
California Capitolweek…
END PACKAGE
((Jack))
The department
of drug and alcohol is the state agency charged with making Prop 36 work.
The first job is dividing up 60 million dollars available to counties
to help get that process going…
Joining
us now,
Kathy Jett, with the Department of Alcohol and
Drug Programs.
And State
Attorney General Bill Lockyer.
((Jack))
Kathy, what
resonates from that story we just saw is the quote, “I’m full; I have a waiting
list.” You’ve got a really ambitious
policy change here that you’ve got to get off the ground by July 1st. How are we doing?
((Kathy Jett, Department of Alcohol
and Drug Programs))
So far,
I think we’re doing well. I think
we’re through the phase where local counties fight over who is going to get
what portion of the money, and the focus has become capacity by July 1st. The numbers are starting to become real.
We’re starting to see that there are probationers and parolees that
are going to come into the system. We’re assessing the number of beds—
((Jack))
Everybody
is saying, “Oh my God, this is a huge project we’ve got to get done.” Is that where we are right now?
((Kathy Jett, Department of Alcohol
and Drug Programs))
It is a
huge project, and we have the judges, we have District Attorneys, we have
probation and patrol, we have treatment providers, and local law enforcement
all sitting at a table and having to come up with what those numbers are. How many people are coming into our county?
What’s the capacity we have today, and what are we going to need on
July 1st? So, right now, they’re really implementing
the act, and they’re really focussing on that July 1st date and
what they’ll need.
((Melissa))
All right,
Larry, as we look at this approaching date, how is this going to change what
goes on in the courtroom, and is this going to be effective, or will it make
your job more difficult?
((Larry Brown, CA District Attorney’s
Association))
We were
strong opponents of Prop 36, but the District Attorneys respect the fact that
the voters have spoken, and so we consider it our responsibility to implement
the new law. Certainly, there will
be some difficult aspects to it. The
judges’ ability to control the cases has been seriously eroded by Prop 36,
and losing some of that control that both prosecutors and judges have enjoyed
on these cases is going to require a real change in mindset I would say.
((Melissa))
Judge Shaver,
is that going to change your job? You
are actually now supportive of some of the changes and options it gives you
in the courtroom.
((Donald Shaver, Superior Court Judge))
We’re fully
committed to making Prop 36 effective, and to making it possible to provide
effective drug treatment throughout the state.
You know, Melissa, it’s been said by one famous woman that “it takes
a village to raise a child,” and I think the same spirit applies to drug addicts
too. It takes a community to help
a drug addict, and so we’re collaborating with the courts; the courts are
collaborating with the Department of Drug and Alcohol Programs, the public
defenders, the district attorneys, and the whole community to make this program
work.
((Jack))
Back to
that theme though. We heard in that
story, “I’m booked, and I have a waiting list for my programs.” We know that the state of California could
be spending up to 70 billion dollars just to buy power this year, and we hear
the stories about these programs that work, but there are not enough of them.
Where are we going to find the money to do this right?
((Bill Lockyer, State Attorney General))
Well, hopefully,
the expenditures that the state is making to pay for energy will eventually
be repaid by ratepayers at least to make the public programs whole, but it’s
a very good question that effects every program. Now, with respect to this, writing law by initiative
isn’t the best way to write a law, but we all have a duty to support that—
((Jack))
We do a
lot of that here in California, don’t we?
((Bill Lockyer, State
Attorney General))
Well, we
do a fair amount. Mostly after the
fact, we worry about some details that did not get through ahead of time. Well, that’s what we’re doing now in the legislature
to try to figure out how to implement these policies. What’s the role of the probation officer?
Because you’re going to have a much expanded probation services program
under this law. What are the drug testing needs to make sure
that we try to keep people honest who are in this alternative diversion program.
((Jack))
But the
voters have spoken, and, Rick, from you point of view right there on the line
of law enforcement, what’s going on?
((Captain Rick Braziel, Sacramento
Police Department))
Well, if
you look at the proposition, most of the effects are post-arrest, at least
on the first offense. Like the D.A.’s
office, the laws are there, and our job is to enforce the laws, so for us
at the beginning, how we do business won’t change. The effect that it has on a neighborhood like in the piece it said
before, the program is full, where do they go?
((Jack))
They go
right back out, and now you’re dealing with them again.
((Captain Rick Braziel, Sacramento
Police Department))
Correct,
and instead of being in the court system and eventually the correction system,
they’re back out on the street and in the neighborhoods, so our second concern
is, what happens to the folks that do not comply with the treatment or do
it at face value and are really not trying to rehabilitate? But the benefit of all this has been, as Kathy Jet pointed out,
that there is this huge collaboration now.
Before you law enforcement, the D.A.s, the public defenders, and service
provider. Now, at least in this county,
in Sacramento county, we’re all at the same table and dealing with the same
population and trying to make this thing work, and we’re all giving our two
cents and asking, “How do we accomplish what we set out to accomplish?”
((Melissa))
Practically
speaking, does it change on a day to day basis what law enforcement tries
to do? Say you're looking at a drug
sting, is it something you maybe think twice about now because of the punishment
has maybe been lifted in some cases?
((Captain Rick Braziel, Sacramento
Police Department))
No, we’re
not going to change how we do things. There
are two aspects to it. There is the
carrot and the stick. The carrot is
you get arrested, you go through the treatment programs, you rehab, you’re
never going to get into the correction side of this. The stick is if you continue to offend, you’re
going to end up in prison eventually, but you have a couple of opportunities.
Understanding that drug addiction is a medical condition, they have an addiction,
and we need to treat that addiction, so from our end of it, we’re going to
continue doing what we have to do. In order to get them into the system, there has to be an arrest,
so we’ll continue to do that and process the folks.
((Melissa))
Kathy, what
kind of coordination is this going to take to make that law enforcement is
not handicapped?
((Kathy Jett, Department of Alcohol
and Drug Programs))
Well, I
think the coordination that we’re seeing in the state was already there. I mean, these are not new cases. We’ve had drug abuses in our system all along,
so there has been a collaboration of sorts that existed. In the counties and cities that have drug courts,
they seem to be the most advance. Sacramento
and others are the most advanced because they’ve worked together with the
court systems; they’ve dealt with doubts; they’ve educated the courts and
law enforcement about the medical factors in drug abuse, so they’re far ahead
of counties that don’t have drug courts, but even in the counties that do
not have drug courts, the providers have always talked to probation; they’ve
always had to go to the courts around these cases, so this isn’t a brand new
issue. It’s simply solidifying a collaboration
that was already there, and there’s an educational effort.
Our treatment providers are having to learn a lot more about the judiciary
system. They’re having to learn a lot more about writing
reports that will satisfy probation and law enforcement, so really there’s
a back and forth learning process that’s going on, and it’s happening naturally
out there.
((Jack))
Did voters
decide to do this because they wanted to save money, or did they decide they
wanted to make a major policy change?
((Bill Lockyer, State Attorney General))
I think
both.
((Jack))
So, there
is no going back. The voters have
spoken.
((Bill Lockyer, State Attorney General))
Well, people
can always reconsider, but I wouldn’t think so. A big unknown now, for example is that almost
everybody in state prison for drug possession was actually busted for dealing,
and D.A.s reduce the charge to possession in order to move cases along, and
they serve some short sentence. We
don’t know yet if the D.A.s are going to keep the original charges and then
there will be more prison time for more people that’s longer or whether the
alternative system will be relied upon more, and I think that will vary from
county to county.
((Jack))
Larry, you
and Judge Shaver have been on this program before discussing this topic from
the other side and right now you seem very supportive to get this going. What are your fears?
((Larry Brown, CA District Attorneys
Association))
Well the
fears are—you said at the top of your show that this is for first and second
time offenders, but that is not technically true. This measure applies to the first and second offenses that a person
commits after Prop 36 becomes effective, but it may the fifteenth or twentieth
conviction for that person, so we’re going to be dealing with people who have
a very long, extensive criminal history, and now the court’s hands are tied,
and they’re to treat them as a first time drug offender. It probably comes as a surprise to a lot of
people that since the 1970’s California has had mandatory diversion for true
first time offenders. That’s why I
agree with Kathy Jett.
This isn’t a new animal, having treatment for drug offenses in California. We were actually ahead of the curve nationally.
It’s just that we’ve expanded the population dramatically under the
terms of Prop 36.
((Melissa))
Judge, how
does this change the sentencing aspect in terms of your discretion in the
courtroom? Prop 36 does provide for
exceptions, obviously, if there was a weapon involved in the offense and so
on, so it doesn’t apply to all drug offenders.
((Donald Shaver. Superior Court Judge))
It doesn’t.
You’re absolutely right, and there’s been a lot of ballyhoo about what
Prop 36 does, but really the most important part of the whole scheme is what
it doesn’t do, and the judges do retain a lot of control over these defendants
because they are on probation. The
statewide Prop 36 implementation work group from the judicial council has
been looking at what models could be used to implement Prop 36, and we’re
doing our best in each of the counties to try to show that the drug court
model for the more chronic offenders is the best way to go, and we’re doing
our best to make Prop 36 look as much like traditional drug courts as possible
because Prop 36 is rather ambiguous. There’s
going to be a lot of disputes over what it really does say, but in the meantime,
we’re going to use as much leeway as we have to hold people accountable and
hold people to task in a drug treatment program.
((Jack))
In drug
court you test. Drug testing is a
routine element in drug court?
((Donald Shaver, Superior Court Judge))
In treatment you
test, and we use treatment at drug court, so urine testing is a standard adjunct
to all treatment programs.
((Jack))
Is there
a question, though, about drug testing under Prop 36?
((Bill Lockyer, Attorney State General))
Only that the
proposition doesn’t allow the money being allocated for testing, so there
will have to be some supplemental funding.
I think that’s—
((Jack))
That sounds
like a Catch-22 to me.
((Bill Lockyer, Attorney State General))
Well, if
the budget holds up, and there are problems there as you indicated, but if
the budget holds up, the Governor and legislature will appropriate money,
supplementary money, for those needs.
((Jack))
How do you
implement a program like this without drug testing? How could you possibly—
((Bill Lockyer, Attorney State General))
Well, I
personally think you have to have it.
((Jack))
You can’t.
((Bill Lockyer, Attorney State General))
Yeah, and I personally
think you have to have it, but what they said in the proposition is not that
you can’t do it, but that you can’t pay for it out of the bundle of their
money, and the supporters of the proposition now are largely in favor of providing
money for testing.
((Melissa))
Kathy, you
wanted to respond?
((Kathy Jett, Department of Alcohol
and Drug Programs))
Well, and
as the judge indicated, drug testing is part of treatment. That’s part of how a treatment program monitors
success, and so we’ll continue to fund that through the treatment side.
We just can’t use the Prop 36 money.
((Melissa))
Captain,
you’re on the streets every day. This
is definitely going to impact how you do your job. When we look at the drug testing and the funding issues, is it harder
to embrace Prop 36 if you worry about some of the funding and the implementation?
((Captain Rick Braziel, Sacramento
Police Department))
Well, I
think if you ask anyone who is putting it together, they will tell you that
it is highly underfunded, and when you’ve got limited resources, do you put
it at the education and treatment component?
Do you put it at the testing or more of the supervision component? And once you’ve—
((Melissa))
Is it more
of a problem of convincing people that this is not a drug addict problem,
this is not a court problem; this is a community problem in how we deal with
drug offenders?
((Captain Rick Braziel, Sacramento
Police Department))
You will
find that the community, in my opinion, will become more aware of this when
the treatment is conducted in their neighborhood because that’s where most
of the treatment facilities are now—
((Melissa))
And do you
think it’s going to become a safety issue?
((Captain Rick Braziel, Sacramento
Police Department))
Uh, it will
in certain places. I mean, there are
certain parolees that before law enforcement would arrest them on a drug violation,
knowing that they would be violating their parole and be sent back to prison
instead of waiting for them to commit a more serious offense. Now, it’s one of those situations where you
arrest them, and if they go into a treatment program and they’ve got a propensity
to commit that more serious offense, they’re still going to go out and commit
that offense, much like the D.A. pointed out, and these folks are going to
be completing treatment programs in neighborhoods, so we have to be really
careful how we address the neighborhood issues with the community leaders
and “why do I have it in my backyard?” Because
we’re going to get a lot of NIMBYism. We don’t want these folks in our backyard.
((Jack))
((Bill Lockyer, State Attorney General))
And a lot of fights
before City Councils about the location of these treatment centers, so expect
that as part of the next phase. It’s
absolutely important that we expand treatment.
It should have been done years ago, we know that it works if it’s done
smart. I wish the proposition had
paid for it rather than promised something that is unrealized without more
funding.
((Jack))
Maybe this
is a good time to take a closer look at the people who are involved in this
issue. Let’s take a firsthand look
at what it takes to break the cycle of drug addiction. Here’s one San Diego man’s story about his battle to stay clean
and sober.
RECOVERING ADDICT PACKAGE