A Washington County lawmaker is trying to strip a much-criticized volunteer state council of its authority to determine the distribution of funds for addiction recovery services authorized by Oregon’s voter-approved drug decriminalization law, Measure 110.
State Sen. Wlnsvey Campos, D-Aloha, is sponsoring legislation that would remove a key function of the Measure 110 Oversight and Accountability Council that the law set up.
“The current funding process has hindered our state’s ability to adequately serve Oregonians in need of behavioral health services,” Campos told the Legislature's Joint Committee on Addiction and Community Safety Response during a hearing Wednesday evening.
Oregon lawmakers last year substantially rewrote Measure 110, which decriminalized possession of small amounts of meth and fentanyl. The rewritten bill recriminalized drugs and created county-run “deflection” programs that allow some people caught with drugs to opt for treatment instead of prosecution.
But the revision did not change the council’s role in distributing hundreds of millions of dollars in cannabis tax revenue to regional networks to fund housing, support services and other programs.
During the hearing, county officials and others asked a legislative panel to effectively take that power away. Speaking in support of Campos’ legislation, they said the council’s most-recent round of grant decisions relied on a faulty process that will abruptly shift resources and harm vulnerable populations.
Opponents include Multnomah County, which stands to lose money, and the Health Justice Recovery Alliance, which spearheaded Measure 110.
Tera Hurst, executive director of the alliance, told lawmakers that her group wanted to work with counties to improve the funding process. But she said that making changes now would cause “chaos and uncertainty for providers.”
“We can’t do that to them,” she said.
The oversight council last week finished awarding its most recent round of grants to non-profits and treatment providers, with the money expected to go out in July.
If passed, Campos’ legislation would go into effect immediately and would apply a new funding formula to all new Measure 110 grants and funding.
Council applies lived experience
The council was central to Measure 110 supporters’ vision of diverting cannabis taxes to support services to reduce the harms to people of using drugs. The goal was offer help to Oregonians with substance use problems instead of punishing them.
The composition of the council, whose members are appointed by the Oregon Health Authority, is intended to reflect the perspectives of communities affected by the war on drugs. Many of the council’s 18 voting members are in recovery or have been incarcerated. Others include providers or experts in drugs and addiction.
However, the council has struggled at times. The grant program has faced scrutiny. And its decision-making has attracted criticism from local officials, among others.
Most recently, the plan it adopted to divvy up $427 million through 2029 has sparked complaints. The funding plan adopted by the council would provide $55 million less for services to Oregon’s three largest counties than a population-based formula would. The plan was intended to provide rural counties with a stable base of funding.
Washington and Clackamas counties went to court in October seeking to block the funding distribution plan, arguing the public did not have a sufficient chance to give input.
Now Campos is sponsoring an amendment to Senate Bill 610, which had called for a study of the council’s funding distribution. The amendment, however, would create a new board and put it in charge of the funding instead of the council.
The board’s 13 members would be appointed by the governor and would include local health officials, community mental health program directors, a county representative, Oregon Health Authority staff, people with lived experience of substance use disorder and members of the council.
Beginning in June 2029, the new board would create the funding formula that would guide decisions to award addiction and recovery treatment funds across the state. In the meantime, the legislation would create a new funding formula that would apply to grants.
Mjere Simantel, the director of Washington County Health and Human Services, told lawmakers that the proposed new formula would spread the loss of funding more evenly. Counties would see 12% less funding on average versus the 26% in the council’s formula, she said.
Additionally, the legislation would direct the secretary of state to audit previous grants to determine if they were being used to increase access to treatment.
Marion County also supports the bill. Commissioner Danielle Bethell told lawmakers that her county would lose $10.5 million under the council’s plans. She said the county will be particularly hurt because it is home to the Oregon State Hospital, two penitentiaries and a large youth facility.
“The current process that we're faced with is a very disproportionate funding system,” she said.
Deflection not funded
Both Measure 110's wording and the campaign supporting it stressed treatment in arguments to voters, but only a small amount has gone to residential treatment programs. Backers say that was what they intended because Medicaid funds can support residential treatment as opposed to Measure 110 funds. Treatments providers, however, say Medicaid rates don't nearly cover their costs.
That debate continues, as some local officials think the council should doing more to fund deflection programs intended to get people into treatment.
Jessica Pratt, lobbyist for the Association of Oregon Counties, told lawmakers that Campos' legislation would fix what she called “the persistent and grievous issues and the governance of the drug treatment and recovery services fund expenditures.”
She said that many counties have indicated that their deflection programs “will simply not work” under the council’s funding formula.
The council’s request for grant applications form does not mention deflection programs. However, the council’s application review panel decided not to approve funding for deflection programs because they were not broadly open to the public and could only by going through the criminal justice system.
Kendra Harding, LifeWorks NW’s director of addiction services, told lawmakers she was concerned about how some counties received funding for deflection services while others did not.
“We respectfully ask for a reset, as it appears that the current procurement process was flawed,” she said. “As nowhere did the criteria state that those participating in deflection programs would not be eligible for funding.”
County complaints
Unlike many other state boards and commissions, the council posts few documents online that provide information about public comment it has received as well as actions and discussions that took place during its meetings.
Campos’ legislation would require the new board to post comments submitted by the public regarding its funding formula online.
County officials complained during the hearing that they were unable to engage with the council during the recent grant process.
The council assigned members to a panel that reviewed applications before they went to a full vote. The panel recommended that the council not fund a $6 million application from Washington County Health and Human Services for harm-reduction services on the basis that the funds would be used on 11 staff that could be covered by insurance reimbursements.
Washington County responded to the decision with a statement to The Lund Report calling the decision a “shock” that will hamper its efforts to prevent overdose deaths. The staff positions sought by the county, which had previously received funding, cannot be covered by reimbursements, according to the statement.
“We were not able to correct the record in real time when the inaccurate information was presented,” Washington County Pam Treece said during the hearing. She said the county will appeal, but called it the result “of not having an open process.”
Leticia Welch, a certified recovery mentor supervisor and member of the council, told The Lund Report on Monday that only one of two health authority staff who reviewed applications recommended funding Washington County Health and Human Services and the decision “was part of a comprehensive and structured review process.”
Cherryl Ramirez, executive director of the Association of Oregon Community Mental Health Programs, said in written testimony that her organization is neutral on Campos' legislation because it does not support the formula.
However, she wrote that her group is “deeply concerned” about the council’s “bias” in its most recent grant decisions against county-based mental health programs and substance use disorder treatment providers that she claimed surfaced in recent meetings.
She wrote that health authority staff and council members stated that these providers can bill for their services and don’t need funding — which she said is untrue.
Additionally, Ramirez wrote that the council “randomly” divided up funding “without considering the needs of a county, resulting in jeopardizing effective programs.”
There was also a priority scoring matrix that applicants did not know about resulting in their programs not being considered for funding, she wrote.
Nonprofits, service providers and local governments sought over $1 billion in grants from the council. Welch said that meant difficult decisions.
Welch said the council voted to maintain funding for organizations that had previously received grants as well as those providing culturally specific services. She said the decision by the council was intended to maintain “continuity of care.”
