January 4 Program — Measure 110 continued
Continuing our series on Measure 110, On January 4 we heard from Dr. Camille Cioffi. Dr. Cioffi is a Research Assistant Professor at the Prevention Science Institute at UO. Her research focuses on improving health, mental health, and substance use outcomes among people with substance use disorders who are pregnant and parenting with a particular focus on highly stigmatized populations including people experiencing homelessness and people who inject drugs. Dr. Cioffi presented an overview of what research data show about the methods of dealing with substance abuse and treatment for substance abuse disorders.
She said there is clear evidence of what does works and results in three of the four adults experiencing substance abuse disorders report being in recovery, a condition that affects about 1 in every 10 adults.
The “gold standard,” she said, is medication treatment. As an example, she said, methadone treatment makes it more likely that individuals will stay in some other treatment regimen. She said that even without other treatment, medication treatment is effective. Contingency management –offering incentives to stop using drugs, is also effective, particularly when used in conjunction with medication. Even where there is no approved medication treatment, she said it can prove effective.
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), a common type of talk therapy (psychotherapy) involving work with a mental health counselor (psychotherapist or therapist) in a structured way, attending a limited number of sessions, can be effective for cannabis and alcohol related disorders, but is less effective for so-called hard drugs unless paired with medication management.
Finally, motivational interviewing is effective as a way to motivate other treatment modalities, but less effective as a standalone treatment.
She said that research indicated that any of these treatment approaches needs to be sustained over a significant period. She said that anything less than 30 days did not appear to be particularly effective, especially since there are generally other issues to be addressed in an individual who is under treatment for a substance abuse disorder.
Other methods of treatment, she said, are not supported by clear evidence of success. Simply telling people drugs are bad doesn’t seem to work, nor do short residential stays, particularly when not coupled with some other therapeutic approach. Involuntary treatment also cannot be documented as being effective. While she said there can be short term benefits from involuntary treatment, the research shows no consistent result. In some studies, it seems to have some benefit, in others there are negative effects. The most recent study, she said, out of Massachusetts, appeared to show worse outcomes from involuntary treatment.
Peer support services, like 12 step programs seem to be effective because increased social support can increase confidence and self-esteem. On challenge is that often the ancillary support services are not available unless prescribed by a mental health professional and for many drug users there is no access to insurance so no way these services can be paid for.
She said that there is no evidence that harm reduction services (access to safe needles, safe syringe programs, etc.) are effective, although they can be a way to reach out to users and persuade them to voluntarily enter some form of treatment.
The critical issue with any of these therapies, she said, is that there be some form of coordinated care. Simple referrals alone don’t work. There are too many steps to get people engaged in services without external support. It is important that there be professional help to assess the variety of problems the user faces and find ways to address each of the problems, not just drug use. One positive benefit of Measure 110, she said, is that it has sparked an increase in opportunities for coordination of care.
During the question and answer period Dr. Cioffi was asked directly about the impact of Measure 110 on substance abuse disorders. She said that under Measure 110, more of the evince based treatments, like peer support and crime reduction services were now receiving funding rather than relying solely on private grants. While the measure was designed to increase capacity for treatment, she said, there is still a need for funding more efforts to reach out to users. She also said that very little of the Measure 110 funding was going toward prevention.
Dr. Cioffi described a situation where the drug user finds themselves in an inescapable loop. Users turn to crime as a financial issue since they can’t find employment. But one of the reasons they can’t is they have no access to personal care resources, cannot get housing because of their drug use and can’t get help even if they want because they have no support network to help them find services. Frankly, she said, most drug users don’t even know the Measure 110 exists and don’t know how to access any of the available services.
- Cioffi was critical of the suggestions for 48 to 72 hour “holds” to help reduce use by providing a “window of change.” Many users, she said, often go at least 72 hours between uses and, in addition, find jail a more comfortable place than being on the street, particularly in winter. She was also critical of “forcible detox” saying it more likely that someone would use after release from a situation where they were forcibly detoxed.
To view Dr. Cioffi’s presentation, please click this link: City Club Presentation.
To view the entire program on You Tube, click this link: Measure 110 continued.

Chief Deputy Lane County District Attorney Chris Parisa spoke on behalf of a group of district attorneys, chiefs of police, sheriffs, and the League of Oregon Cities about an eleven-step proposal to adopt legislation which, he said, would reverse some of the excesses and mistakes made in Measure 110.
When asked about the impact that recriminalization might have on the justice system, Mr. Parosa acknowledged that it might put an additional strain on the ability to prosecute offenders but, he argued, the thrust of the proposals is not to convict people, but to find ways to effectively get them to accept treatment and, thereby, be diverted from the criminal justice system. If they are successful, he said, the prosecutors and public defenders would be able to accommodate any increased burden.
The project is a public private partnership between Lane County, which holds the highest recycling rate of any county in Oregon, and Bulk Handling Systems. Bulk Handling Systems (BHS) is headquartered and has its main manufacturing facility in Eugene, Oregon. BHS is a worldwide leader in the innovative design, engineering, manufacturing and installation of sorting systems and components for solid waste management, recycling, waste-to-energy, and construction and demolition industries.
Concerns that have been raised about the project relate to the fact that the funding mechanisms would require regular increases in garbage rates over the next several years. Thes would result from increases in the “tipping fee” which Lane County imposes on haulers. That fee, which makes up about 20 percent of the average garbage bill would go up significantly to fund the costs of the $135 million project, which would be funded by $35 million from the County and $100 million from BHS. BHS will recoup some of its spending by selling the methane generated at the plant. The County expects to recover fees from plastic producers who are obliged to support recycling under legislation passed in 2019. Current estimates suggest that residential rates would rise by about 10 to 14 percent over the next six years and commercial rates would rise by 14 to 20 percent over that time.
“We live in a world of news of assertion,” Gleason said, as opposed to fact-based news. The line between journalism and social media is constantly blurred. Too often, he added, people immediately jump to conclusions:” if it is consistent with what I believe, it must be true.”
In most cases, as a member of the audience said, the government proposes a solution to a problem it sees, often one that won’t occur for five or ten years. This immediately divides the public into those who support the idea and those who oppose it. BEST takes the approach, according to Mr. Zako, of starting from the other end, by reaching out to the public to see what issues they see today, not in the future, and what they see as ways to solve the issues that now exist. It works with communities to find acceptable solutions and then tries to generate support for those solutions among the public, and civic institutions before approaching government.
Has the program succeeded? Because of the way that the state keeps statistics it is not easy to directly attribute improvements in the graduation rate to Connected Lane County programs, Ms. Larwick pointed to numerous successes which strongly suggest that there has been a positive impact as part of the increase of the graduation rate to 80 percent for the 2021-22 school year.
Rep. Lively noted that typically most legislative work is actually done in committees, and when bills emerge from the committees with a favorable recommendation they generally pass. That was not the case this session, he said, with more bills than usual failing on the floor. In part because of that he pointed to a number of issues which were not addressed, including attempts to address the adverse revenue impact that growth of the Oregon Lottery has had on tribal casino revenue. “It’s an issue of fairness,” he said, that will have to be dealt with in the coming short session. Similarly, he said bills to resolve several limitations on cannabis business activities failed because attention was diverted by the turmoil surrounding activities of the former Secretary of State.
The property remained under the original master plan approved in 2008, but the new group had a much different vision for the property – a vision that contemplated much more residential use, and public uses such as a school and a church, with relatively little commercial uses. That makes it even more intriguing that the group purchased the property “as is” with none of the entitlements that it would need to modify the master plan, the land use designations, and the zoning to accomplish their objectives. The process generally moves rather slowly; thus it is no surprise that much work needed to be done on getting the changes needed to make development possible when, in March 2020, the City in essence shut down because of the COVID pandemic. What is a surprise to many is that in the face of that, with City staff working remotely, the developer and the City process over 14 significant land use actions over the next two years.
Responding to questions, Mr. Ivanov agreed that there have been some challenges dealing with parking issues in the constructed part of the development. He said that much of that can be attributed to so many tradesmen being on the site and that problems should ease once construction is completed next year.
Springfield has completed the land assembly process for new development in the riverfront area of Glenwood, according to Economic Development Manager, Allie Camp. In combination with private and public sector partners, the group now controls about 30 acres in the northeast corner of Glenwood and has begun the Master Planning process which will give increased definition to the goals set out in the Glenwood Refinement Plan, she said. That process is expected to take about 18 months. Glenwood, which is an urban renewal area, and the Downtown Urban Renewal Area, which extends to 23rd Street, are the two focus areas for near term economic development. To see the slide presentation at the August 17 City Club, click:
One unfortunate development is the decision to revisit the proposed Blue McKenzie development, which the Springfield Economic Development Agency decided, in June, will not move forward as previously envisioned. SEDA will continue to search for suitable opportunities to bring more housing to downtown. Most of the area of the Downtown Urban Renewal Plan is zoned community commercial, is a very flexible zoning standard. Thus, she said, while other factors may exist to keep property owners from moving to develp0, the question of zoning is not one.

