I hate to be a dummy (and I have plenty of experience), but what will be the specific functions of the drug courts mandated by HB 53 (on the Guv's desk)for counties of 200,000+? It appears to be no more than a glorified probation officer, fulfilling the express instructions of the real courts, for which court costs for crminal cases will increase again. Is there supposed to be something more intimidating about appearing before a "magistrate" that reporting to a probation officer? And, even though there is supposed to be state/federal funding for the programs, are there not going to be county funding requirements to pay for court-appointed attorneys (from the original case), prosecutors, probation officers, etc., all of whom have to appear in the drug court? Just wondering.

Rick, you are on the right track.

There is no real definition of a "drug court." And, actually, it is a misnomer to refer to a "court." The bill actually talks about a "drug court program." Again, there is no workable definition of such a program. It could be simply an enforcement of the probation laws, as you suggest. The general intent is to expand the use of treatment and encourage the diversion drug offenders away from prison and into the community.

And, as you seem to suspect, there are hidden costs that the Leg just drops on counties. The bill provides no real funding. It merely tells counties to apply for state and federal grants, knowing full well that such grants couldn't possible be given to very many counties and, even for those that get such funds, the funding couldn't possibly cover all the costs of a program. It's just a tricky way to impose the cost of felony criminal justice on counties rather than the State.

Of course, the real problem is the threat within the bill: create such a program or you are disqualified from receiving probation funding. What kind of sick funding mechanism is that? Oh, and if your request for grant funding is denied, then you are OK in not having a drug court program.

And this stuff passes as real reform.

By the way, it is HB 530, and you can read it by clicking here.

[This message was edited by JB on 05-25-07 at .]