Oregon lawmakers are delving into the task of monitoring the effectiveness of the state’s new drug possession law in addressing Oregon’s fentanyl addiction and overdose crisis.
House Bill 4002, which went into effect on September 1, is now starting to be implemented. The bill has reversed the decriminalization of low-level drug possession and has allocated funds to county officials. They now have the option to establish deflection programs that can assist individuals in avoiding charges if they actively seek treatment or other forms of recovery services.
The effectiveness of the programs in preventing incarceration and facilitating treatment remains largely unknown in the 28 participating counties.
According to Ken Sanchagrin, the executive director of Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, there has been a significant increase in drug possession arrests statewide since September 1. He shared this information during a hearing with lawmakers in the Joint Committee on Addiction and Community Safety Response.
In just one week since the law was implemented, law enforcement officials apprehended a total of 227 individuals on charges of drug possession. This figure stands in stark contrast to the previous average of approximately 50 weekly arrests made following the passing of Ballot Measure 110 in 2021, a measure aimed at decriminalizing low-level drug possession.
Not all of the increase can be attributed to the new law. When individuals are arrested by the police for possessing controlled substances, the charges they face can range from a misdemeanor to a felony, depending on the circumstances. The new law introduced a misdemeanor charge, while more serious misdemeanors and previous felony charges still remain in effect.
During the initial three weeks of September, Oregon law enforcement authorities recorded a total of 650 arrests related to the possession of controlled substances. However, it is worth noting that some of these individuals were also facing outstanding warrants or other charges, thereby eliminating the possibility of deflection. Out of the entire group, 167 arrests were solely made for the offense of possessing a controlled substance.
From arrest to treatment
In Deschutes County, the police have had some notable success stories during their encounters. For instance, they once came across a man in a car who had recently used fentanyl. Recognizing that he was open to seeking help, the officers assisted him in enrolling at a treatment center. Within just two hours, he began a medication for opioid treatment and was admitted to an inpatient detox facility. Remarkably, by September 12, which was less than two weeks before the implementation of the new law, he had already transitioned into a sober living house designated for individuals in recovery.
“I’m committed to making a lasting impact in this field,” expressed Kropf, a representative from Bend, emphasizing his long-term dedication.
It may take some time for deflection numbers to be reported as some programs allow individuals to decide whether or not to participate. In certain situations, an arrest or citation may be initially recorded, but the person involved could ultimately choose to participate and avoid facing charges in court.
Ten counties, including the three counties in the Portland region, currently have active programs, while others, like Baker County, have also initiated their own programs. The remaining counties are scheduled to commence their programs in October and beyond.
Complaints about funding
Multnomah County received $4.3 million, while Lane County was allocated $2.1 million for deflection programs. Additionally, rural counties were granted a minimum of $150,000.
According to Sanchagrin of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, they received feedback from several rural counties stating that the allocated amount of $150,000 was “completely inadequate.” This amount, along with the urgency to launch the deflection programs quickly, deterred smaller counties without dedicated staff from applying for grants.
The eight counties that are not implementing deflection programs are all rural, including Coos, Curry, Douglas, Jefferson, Lake, Sherman, Wallowa, and Wheeler.
He said that if there is an increase in funding and counties are given more time in the future to join, it could potentially attract smaller counties.
He mentioned that despite the challenges, the participants demonstrated remarkable creativity in finding ways to achieve more with limited resources.
Senator Floyd Prozanski, the co-chair of the committee, expressed his concern regarding certain counties imposing restrictions on who can access deflection programs. He fears that such limitations may lead individuals to resort to the court system instead.
He questioned, “Where are we heading with this? The truth is, we’re essentially establishing a system that won’t provide equal protection.”
Sanchagrin emphasized that the definition of deflection is quite broad, a topic that was extensively debated by the grant review committee. However, he also highlighted the importance of examining the outcomes in specific counties to determine what strategies are effective and what strategies are not.
“If one county has only a few successes and another has hundreds, then I believe that will be a topic of discussion for all of you,” he remarked.
