As drug courts’ success is celebrated, the future is uncertain 

Posted: 1:00 am Mon, May 24, 2010
By Michelle Lore

Ramsey County District Court Judge Joanne Smith presided over the county’s Adult Substance Abuse Court 100th Graduation Ceremony last week. (Photo: Bill Klotz)

Last week’s celebration of Drug Court Week — a day to recognize the efforts of those involved in drug courts’ many successes — came at time where the courts’ future is uncertain. Minnesota Supreme Court Chief Justice Eric Magnuson issued the proclamation establishing the week as part of the National Drug Court Month campaign coordinated by the National Association of Drug Court Professionals. There are currently 37 drug and mental health courts statewide.However, at least one juvenile drug court has closed due primarily to budget constraints – and a couple of others are in danger of being shut down. The drug courts in the 9th District — in Crow Wing and Aitken counties — are seeking federal grants that will allow them to remain open. Absent the grants, they’ll terminate at the end of the year. Three DWI courts in the district also are also threatened with closure for budgetary reasons.Pam Norenberg, the 9th District drug court administrator, said the courts have received federal funding in the past but that she doesn’t hold out much hope this year because of nationwide competition for the money. “It’s sad because with this population we target, they are addicts … and you have to deal with their difficulties,” she said. “We are seeing some success so that’s what’s so hard [about losing the programs].”“We need a fully funded judiciary to be able to continue drug-court operations,” said Jim Eberspacher, court operations analyst for chemical health. “Will some fold [without it]? More than likely yes, and that’s unfortunate.” But Eberspacher and other supporters of the drug court concept are confident that despite the tough economic times, with a little imagination in coming up with new money, most of the courts will survive.“We’ll keep going,” said Heidi Heinzel, Ramsey County’s drug court coordinator. “We might have to look at how we do business but we’re going to be able to continue. … I don’t see [drug courts] going away.” Tough timesThe driving principle behind drug courts is rehabilitation rather than incarceration in chemical-dependency cases involving nonviolent offenders. Proponents contend that the programs are effective at helping drug and alcohol addicted defendants get back to sober and productive lives, thereby reducing crime and recidivism.Magnuson, a strong supporter of drug courts, believes they are one of the most significant changes to the court system since the creation of the juvenile court system 100 years ago.“Research shows that this approach is far more effective than traditional court strategies at reducing repeat offenses, improving public safety and helping offenders become law-biding citizens,” the chief said in an e-mail to Minnesota Lawyer.The initial monetary investment in the courts and the defendants, supporters say, is more than worth it — for the participants, the courts and society. “If we can invest a little money up front, that’s going to pay off in the long run,” said Heinzel.Minnesota’s first drug court was created 14 years ago in Hennepin County under then-Chief Judge Kevin Burke. Other counties began looking into the concept in 2001, when the judicial branch and the Minnesota Department of Public Safety’s Office of Justice Programs began a collaboration to implement more drug court programs throughout the state.“Since that time, they’ve expanded pretty rapidly,” said Chisago County District Court Judge Robert Rancourt, co-chair of the Drug Court Initiative and vice chair of the board of National Association of Drug Court Professionals.In 2007, more than $5 million in state and federal money was made available to continue existing drug courts and to begin new ones. But times have changed. Many drug courts are now struggling to stay alive and seeking funding from whatever sources they can. According to Eberspacher, only a small portion of their budget comes from the judicial branch. The Judicial Council says how much money will go to each district for drug courts, and the districts allocate how much to give each court within its borders, he said. “What we are able to give [drug] courts we fund isn’t enough to keep them going,” Eberspacher acknowledged. So they turn to other sources, including state agencies, county boards and the federal government for grants. “Some county boards have been really good and funded all positions while others say no this is a statewide responsibility,” said Judge Joanne Smith, who handles the drug court calendar in Ramsey County.For now at least, the state’s drug courts are doing the best they can with the limited funds they have.Many drug courts have taken steps to improve efficiency, Eberspacher said. Others have cut aspects of their programming to provide services more cheaply or have limited the number of people allowed in to their programs, he said. Eberspacher acknowledged that while improving efficiency is “never a bad thing,” problems arise when courts start cutting back on services or the number of people they can serve.They will surviveThe key to the continued vitality of drug courts, proponents say, is to come up with new and inventive ways to find money.Rancourt said the courts are working with other stakeholders — probation, prosecutors, public defenders, counties and heads of executive agencies like corrections and public safety — to find a long-term solution for funding. “We are at a critical stage with drug courts,” said Rancourt. “We want to make it part of our core function and get a dedicated funding stream for these courts, because that’s how they’ll survive.”Smith agreed that innovation is in order.“I think we have to find ways to be more creative in terms of using the resources we have and in trying to locate other resources — outside of the traditional way of thinking about how we’re going to get money,” she said. Heinzel said that one of the most unique methods they came up with was to form a nonprofit — the SOBER (Solving Obstacles By Empowering Recovery) Foundation — and partner with the St. Paul Foundation to serve as its fiscal agent.All donations to the drug court program will go through the foundation, which will audit and supervise the money, Heinzel explained. The partnership also gives us more access to potential donors, she said. While the strategy has been utilized by drug courts around the country, it’s a first in Minnesota, according to Ramsey County officials. What some drug court proponents would like to see, which has worked in other states, is formation of a pot of money that’s specifically designated for drug and DWI courts and funded by the players who benefit from not having defendants continue to cycle through the criminal justice system. The funds would be overseen by a collaborative body that would make disbursements to start new courts or help sustain existing courts, Smith explained. That way the money would not be tied to the court’s budget, the public safety budget or anyone else’s budget, she added. Drug court supporters are confident that with hard work and creativity not only will the courts survive, they will flourish once again.“I just hope that we’re able to get through these tough times so that when things are good we
can continue to expand a little bit,” said Eberspacher. Similarly, Smith believes that drug courts are here to stay. “I know we’re not going away,” she said. “I think the groundswell will continue. … The genie is out of the bottle and there’s no putting it back.”Key components of Minnesota’s drug courts: • Drug courts integrate alcohol and other drug treatment services with justice system case processing.• Using a non-adversarial approach, prosecution and defense counsel promote public safety while protecting participants’ due process rights.• Eligible participants are identified early and promptly placed in the drug court program.• Drug courts provide access to a continuum of alcohol and other drug and related treatment and rehabilitation services. • Abstinence is monitored by frequent alcohol and other drug testing.• A coordinated strategy governs drug court responses to participants’ compliance.• Ongoing judicial interaction with each drug court participant is essential.• Monitoring and evaluation measure the achievement of program goals and gauge effectiveness.• Continuing interdisciplinary education promotes effective drug court planning, implementation, and operations.• Forging partnerships among drug courts, public agencies and community-based organizations generates local support and enhances drug court effectiveness. (Source: Minnesota Judicial Branch)