HomeMy WebLinkAboutKing County Response to WASPC Letter
Dow Constantine
King County Executive
401 Fifth Avenue, Suite 800
Seattle, WA 98104
206-296-9600 Fax 206-296-0194
TTY Relay: 711
www.kingcounty.gov
May 9, 2023
Dear members of the Blake negotiating group and the King County legislative delegation:
King County received a request to provide legislators with an assessment of and reaction to the
Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs’ (WASPC) letter to House and Senate
members addressing the Conference Report for SB 5536, dated May 4, 2023. We also reviewed
the joint letter from the Washington State Narcotics Association and the Washington Council
of Police & Sheriffs, dated May 5, 2023. The opioid epidemic affects every community, and
law enforcement is one of the entities on the front line. That said, law enforcement’s expertise
is just that: law enforcement. They do not have healthcare expertise with first-hand knowledge
of harm reduction or evidence-based healthcare practices.
In contrast, King County has the expertise and knowledge of what it takes to treat people
suffering from substance use disorder at every stage of their disease as well as enforcing laws
and housing detained people. With this background, our subject matter experts reviewed these
letters, including our Department of Community and Human Services, Department of Public
Defense, Public Health – Seattle & King County, the King County Sheriff’s Office, and the
Department of Adult and Juvenile Detention.
King County strongly urges the Legislature to pass a comprehensive bill addressing the
public use of controlled substances. To be successful, legislation must be evidence-based and
targeted, capable of being enforced and implemented, and accompanied by the scale of
investments in treatment and diversion programs that can deliver the actual help
Washingtonians with substance use disorder need. This legislation should support, not hinder,
parallel public health strategies working to save lives.
As a result, we have significant concerns–outlined below–with many of the requests made by
the law enforcement associations and urge you to reject their inclusion in the final Blake
legislation.
Public use language
One of the few areas of agreement King County has with WASPC is the “use in a public place”
language. Based on existing state law, King County agrees that law enforcement officers would
need to witness a person using drugs in a public place to be enforceable, as drafted in the
conference committee striker. This requirement is impractical. However, the Legislature could
establish drug use as an exception to the requirement that law enforcement personally witness
Blake negotiators and King County legislative delegation
May 9, 2023
Page 2
the criminal behavior. The Legislature has established numerous exceptions that grant law
enforcement probable cause when a crime is supported by a witness’s report. See RCW
10.31.100. Alternatively, the Legislature could require “plain sight” for public possession of
drugs to be a crime. If so, we recommend that the legislature adopt the following:
It is unlawful for a person to knowingly possess drugs in a public place when
the object is plainly and immediately apparent, and the object’s incriminating
nature is apparent.
Drug paraphernalia distribution
The distribution and use of certain items defined as drug paraphernalia are essential to prevent
public health harm among people who use drugs. Research shows that public health programs
distributing syringes, smoking equipment, fentanyl test strips, and other items included in the
definition of drug paraphernalia serve as an important connection point for people who use
drugs. When those individuals are ready to enter drug treatment, they can more easily access
treatment because of their pre-existing connections and trust in these programs. Before a person
who uses drugs is ready to enter treatment, public health distribution of drug paraphernalia—
such as smoking equipment—decreases communicable diseases associated with sharing
smoking equipment. Both chambers passed their version of the Blake fix with this
language, and the Legislature should include it in the final version.
Public health agency drug testing
Public health agencies provide drug testing resources to identify contaminants in the drug
supply, allowing public health agencies to provide accurate information on the risks associated
with certain types of drug use. For example, we are seeing an increase in fentanyl and xylazine
in the drug supply in our region, resulting in significant injuries and unintentional poisonings
among people using drugs and soaring overdose deaths. Missing an opportunity to discover
these substances would be a grave mistake. The Legislature clearly agreed; the House
unanimously passed HB 1006, and the Senate unanimously passed SB 5022. Both bills
allowed drug testing but did not proceed because legislators intended to include this
provision with the Blake fix. We urge you to keep this provision in the final Blake bill.
State preemption of drug paraphernalia
At this time of overwhelming drug overdose deaths, we must eliminate confusion and create
continuity across the state with uniform criteria for drug possession and drug paraphernalia, so
jurisdictions can instead focus on increasing access to harm reduction and treatment resources
for their residents. Allowing local regulation of drug paraphernalia is not a solution to the
overdose crisis. Instead, it will increase the stigmatization of drug users, creating additional
barriers for people seeking care and treatment. Therefore, please maintain state preemption on
drug paraphernalia regulation.
Blake negotiators and King County legislative delegation
May 9, 2023
Page 3
Licensed behavioral health agency conducting substance use disorder (SUD) assessments
Access to available and quality behavioral health treatment is critical for supporting individuals
with substance use disorder on a path to recovery. Assessment programs need to be funded
through Medicaid, which will already require licensure and credentialing. Therefore, this
additional clarification is not needed.
Compliance versus completion of SUD treatment
Setting such a high bar for completion is neither evidence-based nor will it incentivize
individuals to enter diversion programs. Everyone’s pathway to recovery is distinct, and for
many, “substantial compliance” with treatment is the most realistic option. Recovery is a
lifelong process, and many may engage in treatment for years to support ongoing and
continuous recovery. The diversionary period can be successful when shorter than 12 months.
It should be focused on linking people with treatment and other support in the community and
requiring agreement to engage in treatment rather than complete compliance with a treatment
program. See, for example, procedures for Seattle Municipal Court’s Community Court, which
provides for 14-45 days of court jurisdiction over the community court agreement)
https://www.seattle.gov/documents/Departments/Court/SCCPoliciesandProcedures.pdf pg. 8.
Additionally, requiring behavioral health agencies and treatment providers to monitor
“compliance” with a treatment plan creates an additional burden on over-stretched behavioral
health providers. Treatment providers are clinicians working to support individuals’ access to
quality behavioral health care. Placing additional monitoring, reporting, and paperwork
requirements on treatment agencies will detract from the time available for treating clients and
reduce the system’s capacity to serve this population.
State-certified SUD treatment providers
As stated above, access to available and quality behavioral health treatment is critical for
supporting individuals with substance use disorder on a path to recovery. State law already
gives the Department of Health authority to govern licensure and credentialing of behavioral
health services. Therefore, this additional clarification is not needed.
Prosecutor termination of pretrial diversion
Revocation of pretrial diversion should occur only if the individual is willfully not engaging in
treatment. Prosecutors being able to arbitrarily move to revoke diversion will mean that public
defenders will be much less likely to recommend it to their clients. WASPC’s concerns
regarding revocation for additional crimes are not well-placed. Prosecutors can simply charge
those crimes.
Blake negotiators and King County legislative delegation
May 9, 2023
Page 4
Mandatory minimum sentences
Using mandatory minimums to incentivize people who use drugs to complete treatment is an
outdated and flawed strategy that will increase the jail and prison populations, racial disparities,
crime, and drug overdose harms and deaths. Mandatory minimum sentences have been shown
to increase costs for local government, separate families, and rob individuals of rehabilitation
opportunities. Countless bodies of research, including from the Washington State Department
of Health, have shown that investing in prevention and treatment services has been proven to
be less expensive and more effective at reducing rates of drug use. Incarcerating people and
imposing harsh and inflexible sentences for minor drug offenses increases stigma and has been
shown to disproportionately affect communities of color who do not have equitable access to
adequate healthcare and other substance use prevention and treatment resources.
Most jails do not provide access to necessary addiction treatment services or support recovery
efforts that many need. For example, a 2015 systematic review from Psychological Medicine
found that incarcerating individuals with substance abuse issues was associated with poorer
mental health outcomes than receiving non-custodial interventions such as cognitive
behavioral therapy. Another study published in the 2014 journal Addiction concluded that
incarceration does not reduce drug use or improve treatment outcomes for people with
substance use disorders. The study also found that incarcerated individuals had higher relapse
rates and worse treatment outcomes than those who received other forms of intervention, such
as community-based programs or residential treatment centers. Mandatory minimums will
never actually address the underlying causes of drug use or promote healthier outcomes long-
term. Instead, they simply stand to increase obstacles to stable housing, employment, and long-
term recovery.
Moreover, proposed mandatory minimum sentences have the potential to significantly increase
the length of stay and daily population of jails at a time when jails across the state do not have
the staffing, capacity, or funds to accommodate an increased jail population. Please do not
adopt mandatory minimum sentences.
Law enforcement notification when a patient abandons SUD treatment
The King County Sheriff’s Office does not contend that it requires notice when a patient
abandons treatment. Any notice would more appropriately be directed to the court, the
prosecutor, the patient, and their legal counsel.
Safe consumption site language
WASPC proposes to remove a reference to safe consumption sites in Sec. 26(3)(b) of the
conference committee report. This subsection states that “a health engagement hub is intended
to . . . be affiliated with . . . safe consumption sites.” While Washington does not have any safe
consumption sites, they do provide an opportunity for individuals who use drugs to do so in a
safe environment with access to medical professionals and social services, significantly
reducing the risk of morbidity and mortality. Safe consumption sites are effective at helping
Blake negotiators and King County legislative delegation
May 9, 2023
Page 5
individuals stay alive while providing resources that could lead them toward recovery. At this
fragile and pivotal moment, it is essential to keep the door open to connecting individuals who
use drugs with services instead of limiting ourselves and further punishing those who are
suffering from addiction. The Legislature should not eliminate safe consumption site language.
Harm reduction definition
To ensure that people who use drugs can access treatment and stop using drugs when they are
ready, we must reduce the harms of current drug use—people who die from drug overdose will
never have an opportunity to access substance use disorder treatment and stop using drugs.
Therefore, it is essential to focus on reducing the harm associated with drug use right now
without a requirement that harm-reduction strategies directly end the illegal use of drugs. The
Legislature should not adopt WASPC’s proposed amendment to the definition of “harm
reduction program.”
Sight and sound barriers for recovery residences
Recovery residences can be a vital support for individuals in recovery or engagement in
treatment. According to the Health Care Authority, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration (SAMHSA) defines “recovery residences/homes” “as safe, healthy,
family-like, substance-free living environments that support individuals in recovery from
substance use disorder. All recovery residences center on peer support and a connection to
services promoting long-term recovery. Recovery housing benefits individuals in recovery by:
[(1)] Reinforcing a substance-free lifestyle [and (2)] Providing direct connections to other peers
in recovery, mutual support groups, and recovery support services.” As a result, it is unclear if
a sight and sound barrier between populations would be needed if individuals cannot use
substances in the recovery home.
Sight and sound barriers for health engagement hubs
WASPC proposes to amend Section 26 to include a “sight and sound barrier” between youth
and adults other than treatment providers at health engagement hubs. Health engagement hubs
are a valuable tool in combatting the drug crisis. We support the aim of ensuring that youth are
safely able to access these resources without fear of exposure to trafficking and other dangerous
activities or behaviors. However, it is essential that this requirement does not result in
unreasonable restrictions on service providers that result in fewer youth-serving facilities. If
this requirement is implemented in a way that causes providers to serve adults only, youth who
need housing and other services are more likely to end up homeless or unstably housed, which
makes accessing harm reduction and treatment resources even more difficult. The Legislature
should look to state expertise at the Department of Health, Health Care Authority, and
Department of Children, Youth, and Family to determine safety requirements for health
engagement hubs.
Blake negotiators and King County legislative delegation
May 9, 2023
Page 6
Funding for Arrest and Jail Alternative (AJA) Program
King County agrees that the state must continue to increase funding for alternatives to criminal
legal system involvement, and funding to operate an AJA program in King County would be
beneficial. Additionally, state law currently limits Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion
(LEAD) funding to only jurisdictions outside of King County. The diversity of geographic
context and individual substance use needs requires diverse programs.
However, to strengthen the likelihood of successful engagement in treatment, we strongly
encourage the Legislature to first prioritize programs that are led by community and expert
treatment providers rather than law enforcement. This requires a holistic and comprehensive
set of investments, including:
1. funding for apprenticeship and other education benefits that expand both SUD
professionals and peers in the workforce;
2. lowering barriers to treatment access through intensive care outreach teams, modeled
on Assertive Community Treatment, capacity for same-day/next-day appointments,
flexible funding for providers to increase treatment engagement, increasing funding
and transition teams to connect individuals between services; and
3. immediate access to a place to go, e.g., housing, shelter, or crisis care clinics.
King County appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback and context. Please let me
know if you have any questions or if we can provide additional information. I can be reached
at michwhite@kingcounty.gov or 206.351.1674.
Sincerely,
Michael White
State Relations Director
King County