Is Prop. 36 hindering city's fight against meth?

2006-12-08 / Front Page

Part I in a two-part series
By Avi Rutschman avi@theacorn.com

In Simi Valley's fight against methamphetamine use, officials have stumbled upon an unlikely obstacle: a voter-approved proposition that they argue is preventing them from effectively combating abuse of the drug.

According to officials with the Simi Valley Police Department, meth use is a major issue for the city.

"The use of this drug is on the rise throughout the country," said Sgt. Robert Brill of the Simi Valley Police Department's special enforcement unit. "A lot of it has to do with accessibility. You don't have to go across the border to get the supplies you need to manufacture it. It's easy to cook, readily available, cheap and gives you a prolonged high."

According to Sgt. Stephanie Shannon of the department's auxiliary services unit, meth is one of the hard drugs most commonly found in Simi Valley.

Also called speed, go fast, tweak, crystal, glass, crank and a litany of other street names, meth creates an intense high by releasing extremely high levels of the neurotransmitter dopamine into the brain's pleasure centers, explained Amanda Monville, an intern with the Palmer Drug Abuse Program of Ventura County.

The drug is both toxic and very addictive, and its use often causes damage to the brain, resulting in psychotic behavior.

An increase in meth use in a community often can be directly correlated with a rise in violent crimes, Shannon said.

"In Simi Valley, there has been an increase in violent crimes, identity thefts and property crimes, and in most of these instances, the people that are apprehended are meth users," Shannon said. "We see the same names over and over again, and every time those people commit a crime they're costing the taxp a y e r s money."

The dep a r t m e n t takes a strong enforcement posture toward use and sale of methamphetamine, but some officials say the effort is stymied by Proposition 36.

Proposition 36, passed in 2000, gives first- and second-time nonviolent drug offenders the option to enter a rehabilitation program rather than face prison.

According to officials, the Proposition 36 rehab program, which costs the state $120 million annually to run, each year allows 35,000 of the state's convicted drug users to choose rehabilitation. UCLA is currently conducting a cost-effectiveness study of the program and will release its results next year.

Prior to the passage of Proposition 36, possession of meth was a misdemeanor and offenders commonly received a 90-day minimum sentence.

"Once someone was caught with meth, that person would be gone for three months. That meant that he or she didn't have the opportunity to commit more crimes to fuel their drug habit," Brill said.

Both Brill and Shannon said the program is more of a bane than a benefit to Simi's police department. They said officials feel the program lacks a punitive element, allowing offenders to drop out of counseling without facing repercussions.

"Meth abuse is m u c h worse than any other form of substance abuse and the body develops a dangerous d e p e n dency for it. There is no doubt that people need assistance to get off of it, but these rehabilitation programs need to have teeth. If there are no repercussions for dropping out, people aren't going to feel the need to stay. Regimented counseling can be looked at as a deterrent, but it has to have a punitive element to it, otherwise it's of little use," Brill said.

According to Brill and Shannon, court-mandated counseling programs are largely unregulated and lack stringent guidelines to determine who qualifies for "graduation."

"Basically, anyone can open up shop in their house and hold drug counseling meetings," Brill said. "A lot of folks may get through programs, but they receive little benefit because there aren't any guidelines."

Return to top