With former Syracuse City Auditor Minch Lewis, Syracuse Police Inspector Mike Kerwin, District Attorney William Fitzpatrick and the Post Standard all calling recently for a reviewing of our drug policy comes a truly unique opportunity to change the image of the city. That image can change from that of an undistinguished declining rust-belt city to a progressive community actively working to improve itself. Cities across the country are struggling desperately to survive in these times of tight municipal budgets. The Federal and State government’s drug polices force Syracuse to enforce laws that not only cost the city millions of dollars each year, but are totally ineffective at either reducing illegal drug use or making our streets safer. So what can Syracuse do about it?

The Syracuse Post Standard said “ neither the state nor the city can afford to maintain the current approach. Reform attempts keep stalling, mostly likely because many politicians fear they will look soft on crime to their constituents if they change the system. We all must be smarter than that. It's time to stop talking tough on crime and start acting smarter on crime…”

                                                                                            Syracuse Post Standard editorial, January 03, 2004

The problem facing cities like Syracuse in their attempts to change is that federal and state laws trump local laws. No matter what city officials decide, they cannot make such serious changes as those suggested by Lewis and endorsed by the newspaper. There are, however, some things that can be done. A series of hearings were held by the Finance Committee of the Common Council to look into what changes the city could make that would improve things here without  running afoul of state and federal laws. These hearings would have been a way of gathering specific information to assist the Council in its legislative function.

There are many things, all perfectly within the law, some of which other cities have done, that could reduce the harms incurred under the current policy. New policies that would ease tensions between the police and the communities they police. Policies that would free up limited police resources to focus on violent crime making our streets safer without additional expense. Policies that would put abandoned properties back on the tax roles and improve neighborhoods, improve our schools, and attract business to the city. Experts testifying at these hearings  examined these alternatives, saw which could be implemented here, and what the benefits would be.

 The Post Standard got it right when they titled the above-quoted editorial “Where's Plan B? “ The defenders of “Plan A”, the war on drugs, have been heard from, and their policies implemented, for some thirty years, clearly to no positive effect.

The hearings offered an opportunity for Common Councilors to hear experts talk about the problems with the current policy and what alternatives could be pursued by the city to save money and reduce crime without violating state and federal laws. While other cities have made changes in their policies along these lines Syracuse is  the first city in America to hold hearings to look into a broad range of ideas the city administration could institute.

Among those testifying in the Council chambers were Jack Cole. Cole knows about the war on drugs from several perspectives. Cole retired as a Detective Lieutenant after a 26-year career with the New Jersey State Police. For twelve of those years Cole worked as an undercover narcotics officer. His investigations spanned the spectrum of possible cases, from street drug users and mid-level drug dealers in New Jersey to international “billion-dollar” drug trafficking organizations.

Cole holds a B.A. in Criminal Justice and a Masters degree in Public Policy. Cole has taught courses to police recruits and veteran officers on ethics, integrity, moral decision-making, and the detrimental effects of racial profiling. He has also presented papers at international conferences and spoken on drug policy reform in the European Parliament, as well as over 300 times to students, educators, professional, civic, benevolent, and religious groups in Australia, Canada, Central America, Europe, New Zealand, and across the United States.

Economist Jeffrey Miron, is probably the country’s leading expert in the economic issues states and municipalities face in combating drugs. Miron has served on the National Bureau of Economic Research, and the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Drug Use and the Workplace, and has just completed a book on the costs of drug prohibition to the states. He currently serves as a professor at Boston University and also at Harvard.

Roger Goodman directs the Drug Policy Project at the King County Bar Association in Seattle, which is leading a high-level partnership of professional and civic organizations in Washington State in a critical examination of the War on Drugs and in promoting cheaper, more effective and more humane alternatives to current drug policies.   He is currently an appointed member of the King County Substance Abuse Administrative Board and chair of its Legislative and Public Affairs Committee.  He is also on the Leadership Council of Physicians and Lawyers for National Drug Policy. Goodman was recently elected as a state senator in the state of Washington.

Senator Pierre Claude Nolin chaired the Canadian Senate’s Committee on Illegal Drugs. Under his leadership the committee completed a thorough study of the illegal drug markets and the efforts to eliminate them and made many recommendations for changes in Canadian drug policy. Senator Nolin is a member of the Conservative Party of Canada and has served in the senate since 1993.

Senator Nolin shared the podium with Eugene Oscapella, director of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy. Oscapella is an attorney and does consulting work for the Canadian government on matters relating to both trade issues as well as drug policy. His organization has completed many studies of various aspects of drug interdiction and law-enforcement policies that relate to drug prohibition.

Unfortunately the newspaper, after it's wonderful editorial, gave only the meagerest coverage to the hearings. One small article on the first hearing and nothing on the second. The public was largely unaware of what went on and so few called their city councilors to urge them to incorporate some of the ideas heard at the hearings. Without public support the councilors were afraid to act and so these important hearings led nowhere. We are currently trying to stimulate interest once more so the public can make up their own minds about we can do to make Syracuse a better, safer place for us all. A city with a strong future. A city that can attract business with good schools, safe streets and an enlightened municipal government.