Drug possession arrests have risen since new misdemeanor charge took effect • Oregon Capital Chronicle

Oregon state lawmakers are now beginning to consider whether the new drug possession law will help the state successfully combat Oregon's fentanyl addiction and overdose crisis.

Bill 4002, The law went into effect on September 1 and is currently being implemented. The bill re-criminalized possession of small amounts of drugs and provided funding so that county officials, if they so choose, can set up diversion programs to help people avoid charges if they seek treatment or other recovery services.

Currently, the state has little information on how effective the programs in the 28 participating counties are at keeping people out of prison and getting them into treatment.

What has been increasing since September 1: The number of arrests for drug possession across the state, Ken Sanchagrin, executive director of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, told lawmakers on Tuesday in the Joint Committee on Addiction and Public Safety.

In the first week after the law went into effect, police arrested 227 people for drug possession. In comparison, after the passage of Election Law 110, which decriminalized possession of small amounts of drugs in 2021, police only arrested an average of about 50 people per week for drug possession.

The increase is not solely due to the new law. When police arrest people for possession of controlled substances, suspects can be charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the situation. The law simply added a misdemeanor, while more serious misdemeanors and previous felonies will still be charged.

During the first three weeks of September, police in Oregon recorded 650 arrests for possession of controlled substances. However, some of these arrests were of people who also had warrants or other charges against them, so diversion was not an option for them. In the entire group, 167 arrests were made for possession of a controlled substance alone.

From arrest to treatment

There have been some success stories in police operations, too. In Deschutes County, for example, police contacted a man in a car who had just taken fentanyl. Officers found he was open to treatment and helped him enroll in a treatment center, where within two hours he began opioid treatment and was admitted to inpatient rehab. By Sept. 12 – less than two weeks before the new law took effect – he was in a rehab house for people seeking rehab.

Committee co-chair Rep. Jason Kropf said example-setting is the intended goal of the programs, but stressed that more work remains.

“I’m here long-term to continue the work in this area,” said Kropf, D-Bend.

It will also take a while for the diversion numbers to come in, as some programs give people time to decide whether to participate. In some cases, an arrest or summons will be noted and the person may ultimately participate, avoiding a court charge.

Ten of the participating counties already have programs underway, including all three counties in the Portland area. Some rural areas, such as Baker County, have also already started programs. The others will start in October or later.

Complaints about financing

When lawmakers passed the bill, they allocated nearly $21 million for county and tribe participation and to cover administrative and start-up costs such as staffing and contracts. A total of $211 million is earmarked for related services such as recovery houses, residential treatment facilities and drug treatment in prisons.

The state has allocated $4.3 million to Multnomah County and $2.1 million to Lane County for diversion programs, while rural counties have been given at least $150,000.

Sanchagrin, of the Oregon State Criminal Justice Commission, which administered the grants, said he had heard from many rural counties that $150,000 was “totally inadequate.” That amount, and the quick turnaround of the diversion programs, had deterred some of the smaller counties that don't have the staff to apply for grants, he said.

The eight counties that are not launching diversion programs are all rural: Coos, Curry, Douglas, Jefferson, Lake, Sherman, Wallowa and Wheeler.

If funding is increased and counties have more time to join in the future, smaller counties could be included, he said.

Nevertheless, he said, participants had found impressive ways to “do more with less.”

Senator Floyd Prozanski (D-Eugene), co-chair of the committee, expressed concern that some counties are imposing restrictions on the possibility of diversion and people are turning to the courts instead.

“Where are we headed with this?” he asked. “The reality is that we are essentially building a system that does not provide equivalent protection.”

Sanchagrin said the definition of diversion is very broad, a point the grants review committee has discussed, but he said lawmakers should look at the results in individual counties to see what works and what doesn't.

If one county has few successes and another has hundreds, “I think that will be a point of discussion for all of you,” he said.