Minnesota’s jails and prison are crowded with drug offenders, particularly methamphetamine users. It’s a phenomenon that’s not only wasting lives, but costing taxpayers millions of dollars as well.

McLeod County Attorney Mike Junge pointed to the problem during a recent County Board meeting. “We can’t afford to incarcerate ourselves out of the problem,” he said.

Junge was alluding to the fact that getting tough on meth users is a perplexing, complex issue. He told us Monday that approximately one-third of McLeod County Jail inmates are there because of meth. The tough question is: Should they be somewhere else?

A 2007 report by the state sentencing guidelines commission said $2 million could be saved at prisons alone by giving drug offenders shorter sentences. But evidence shows that offenders aren’t necessarily ready to re-enter society after a shorter stay.

Detoxification and treatment are the key, the same tools used to treat any substance abuse. “But what typically works with alcohol doesn’t work with meth,” Junge cautioned. Unlike alcoholism, meth addiction can’t be treated with a 28-day stay at Hazelden.

The best experts on this subject say what’s needed is 90 days of detox, followed by three to 12 months of treatment, and then ongoing supervision by chemical dependency counselors.

That’s an expensive, time-consuming solution. “There aren’t any easy solutions, but we all agree you can’t lock them up and throw away the key,” Junge said.

Costly treatment
Could millions of dollars be saved by keeping meth addicts out of county jails and sending them to treatment instead? The McLeod County Jail is more crowded than ever because it’s being used to house meth addicts. As a result, the Sheriff’s Office is forced to send many inmates to other jails, which in turn forced county officials to develop plans for a new jail that taxpayers opposed. Instead, the jail is receiving a $1.5 million remodel.

Detoxification and treatment, according to many experts, is an effective alternative. But it’s costly. The more expensive treatment programs tend to have higher success rates. Nine months after beginning therapy, 87 percent of patients treated for heavy or long-term meth abuse in California outpatient and residential programs were abstinent from all drugs, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Meanwhile, meth cooks continue to be sent to jail or prison, where many will stay longer than rapists. The cost of keeping them there is astounding: more than $35,000 a year. Because of our state’s sentencing laws, the average length of pronounced sentences for drug offenses increased from just under two years in 1988 to more than four years in 2002. That potentially could be a $140,000 stay on the taxpayers’ tab, even though most don’t stay quite that long.

The dilemma has been compounded by the spiraling number of meth prosecutions. In 2001, Minnesota prisons housed 230 inmates who were there because they possessed, intended to distribute, sold or manufacture meth. By 2005, that number had more than quadrupled to the point where meth users constituted more than one of eight Minnesota prison inmates.

No simple solution
What’s the solution? No doubt, some meth users deserve prison sentences. And some deserve long sentences, especially if they’re there the second time around or have been convicted of other felonies.

But many users are first-time offenders who have never been in trouble with the law. Many are women. And most come from rural areas. Eighty-seven percent of meth users in our state’s prisons are from outside the Twin Cities area. That’s not to say they’re people you want for your neighbors. Most meth users will cheat, steal and lie to no end to continue their habit.

Fortunately, there’s good news on the horizon. Meth use is slowing, thanks to a new law that makes key ingredients for making meth more difficult to obtain. Meth use by Twin Cities area high school students actually fell during 2007. The rate of incarcerating meth users also dropped slightly during the year.

But as we said before, this is more of a rural problem than an urban one, and many county jails need help now. Incarceration is part of the solution, but it can’t be the sole solution. More than ever, detox, treatment and ongoing support should be considered a first option.

Editorials are written by Publisher Matt McMillan and Editor Doug Hanneman. They can be reached at mcmillan@hutchinsonleader.com [1], or hanneman@hutchinsonleader.com [2].