Ballot Measure 110, put before voters in November 2020, was supposed to be the more humane and less punitive way to help those with drug addictions access treatment services. By decriminalizing the possession of small amounts of drugs and dedicating millions to drug treatment and recovery programs, the idea was to address addiction from a public health perspective rather than a criminal one.

As many citizen initiatives go, however, the good intentions that fueled its passage hit the brick wall of implementation, as the measure’s flaws and the state’s listless management combined to produce disheartening results. An audit released last week by the Oregon secretary of state’s office confirms what multiple news organizations have already reported: Few people are seeking treatment through the hotline set up by the law; the state’s process for issuing grants to providers of substance-abuse programs ran months behind schedule; and the volunteer committee tasked with choosing recipients lacked expertise and guidance, leading to confusion and inconsistencies in grant decisions. The audit also found that the state has failed to collect basic information about how Measure 110 investments are changing access and outcomes, blocking efforts to gauge the law’s effectiveness.

Meanwhile, open drug use abounds and the number of overdose deaths in Oregon skyrocketed 58% in 2021 over 2020. It’s not surprising that some are calling for Measure 110′s repeal, even with the upward trend pre-dating its adoption.

Still, as state auditors and Secretary of State Shemia Fagan emphasized last week in a press conference, it’s too soon to call the measure a failure, even if its early implementation qualifies as such. Channeling the frustrations of many, Fagan called on the state to deliver on the promise of the measure and, as she succinctly put it, “fix it.”

The audit recommendations offer a start. But legislators and Gov. Tina Kotek must be willing to go further and significantly rewrite the law as necessary to pressure more people into treatment while ensuring funds are going to the most critical needs we have. Fulfilling the spirit of the measure should take precedence over sticking to the heavily-flawed letter of it.

The audit’s recommendations are instructive both in showing a path out of the current mess while revealing the inadequate level of planning that went into the measure’s implementation. Among the suggestions: Require data collection and adopt processes to do so; clarify roles and responsibilities for both the Oregon Health Authority and the volunteer committee that determines grant funding; improve the grant application process; coordinate Measure 110 investments with other state agencies, including corrections and housing; and identify the role Measure 110 should play in the overall behavioral health strategy.

Certainly, the mistakes written into the measure leave a lot for the state to clean up. As audit manager Ian Green noted, hindsight shows that decriminalizing drug possession before treatment services were broadly available was not the right move. The alternative path created to prod those using drugs to seek treatment – issuing $100 tickets that can be voided by calling a hotline – has resulted in only 119 calls in the first 15 months. With the cost of staffing the hotline, that works out to $7,000 per call, the audit found. Worse, only 27 of those 119 callers were interested in treatment. Clearly, legislators should address not only the expense of the hotline, which overlaps with another established hotline, but explore whether it can ever be made more effective.

Legislators are already putting together workgroups to examine Measure 110. A few problems in particular demand greater attention. As The Lund Report’s Emily Green wrote as part of a comprehensive series tracking the measure, many communities were disappointed that the grants committee turned down applications to add beds at residential treatment facilities or build out other infrastructure – despite a severe shortage documented by Oregon Health and Science University researchers. Legislators and Health Authority officials should ensure that grant money flows to a community’s highest needs. They and Kotek should be closely monitoring the strategy that the Oregon Health Authority develops, with attention to prevention, treatment, recovery as well as harm reduction.

And as Green reported, Sen. Floyd Prozanski, a Eugene Democrat who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee, is also considering a change that would lower how much fentanyl a person can possess before it’s considered a crime. That revision seems smartly-tailored to the particular threat that fentanyl creates. But legislators should also revisit how to encourage more people to seek treatment as a whole. A KGW report last November noted methods that Portugal – on whose system Oregon’s is loosely based – has adopted that provide non-criminal ways to pressure people to seek help, including follow-up by the health ministry to those who are cited for possession.

Certainly, legislators should tread with respect on legislation passed by voters. But they should also accept that while voters approved the measure, they did not write it. When a law is not working the way it’s intended, it’s up to our elected leaders to show how to achieve the goal.

As terrible as the rollout of Measure 110 has been, it is only two years old. Legislators and Kotek’s administration should recognize they have limited time to put the program on the right path. Because while it might be too soon to call it a failure now, that window is rapidly closing.

-The Oregonian/OregonLive Editorial Board