|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
By Sidhanth Srikanta
Policy can either make or break a community, by either upholding and strengthening a community for the better or deranging and crippling it. For example, Oregon’s Ballot Measure 110 puts drug possession and public usage at “low priority, while officers have to focus on ‘higher priority problems in the city‘.”
In Portland, Measure 110 decriminalized and deprioritized dangerous drugs, leading to 14,000-plus individuals being homeless and a substance abuse disorder rate of 37%.
Comparatively, San Jose has a homeless population of just 3,000 and lower rate of drug overdose than Portland, of approximately 17%. The policy for San Jose is to put drug trafficking and usage as the highest priority issue, with not just treatment but also enforcement to to solve the problem of their city – with emphasis on traditional policing to take care and find out about problems, which leads to better success rates of the programs.
This shows a drastic difference in how one city can interpret policy to a light and more treatment-focused ideal to address this issue, while the other focuses on making a massive communal change and enforcing it to the degree that it won’t permeate any further in the city.
For most, the first idea of treatment as opposed to enforcement doesn’t seem too bad because helping people get out of the situation is definitely needed. But treatment should not be the only thing when it comes to dealing with this problem.
However, results are dramatically different from the enforcement policy. Portland has about 14,000 unhoused people and higher drug abuse rates, while San Jose has around 3,000 and far lower overdose rates.
San Jose’s policy of “zero tolerance of drug dealing and activity” focuses on being proactive in a city environment, trying to eliminate open-air dealing and the use of public spaces to abuse substances. The ideology of “zero tolerance” – meaning that there’s no excuse for any of the criminal problems of drug dealing and drug activity – makes streets safer.
On the local level, a county can be versatile and not end up with mass homelessness and drug abuse on the street. A simple solution is to enact policies that have already worked, like “zero tolerance”, which has been proven effective in cities like San Jose, Miami, Washington D.C., and Atlanta.
With “zero tolerance” policies, police officers have the freedom to help communities by apprehending drug dealers rather than treating drug abuse as a “low priority activity”.
This article was written as part of a program to educate youth and others about Alameda County’s opioid crisis, prevention and treatment options. The program is funded by the Alameda County Behavioral Health and the grant is administered by Three Valleys Community Foundation.
