Our opinion: Needle exchange spending a hasty decision | Opinion

There is no doubt that opioid abuse is a crisis in our community.

It’s a problem that must be addressed on multiple fronts, and solutions will need to involve stakeholders in health care, law enforcement, government and the general public.

So it’s understandable that Dubuque County Supervisors Jay Wickham and Dave Baker wanted to forge ahead immediately when approached about the possibility of starting a needle exchange program in Dubuque. They were likely operating from the “anything to address opioid use” position.

But, when it comes to spending taxpayer money, we expect our elected officials to demonstrate caution and fully vet suggestions that come their way. That’s not how this decision was made.

The board voted, 2-1, to reallocate $10,000 to MercyOne Dubuque Medical Center’s Turning Point Treatment Center for a collaborative study on both the need and viability of such a program. The money would come from $300,000 already set aside to support medication-assisted treatment programs.

Wickham sounded the alarms of the epidemic in defending his decision. “People are dying. Dying. These are serious issues, and I think we need to move fast on it.”

Saving lives is a tough statement to argue with. But there’s more to this issue than that.

For one thing, a successful needle exchange program could stem the spread of communicable diseases, so it might indeed save lives. But it won’t prevent overdose or the presence of fentanyl in heroin that has claimed lives.

Further, Sheriff Joe Kennedy told supervisors that decriminalizing needles and syringes could create new challenges for law enforcement, as drug paraphernalia arrests frequently allow officers to obtain information that leads them to dealers. He’s concerned that such an initiative could actually hamper efforts to reduce the amount of drugs on the streets.

So it’s, at best, unclear whether a needle exchange program would really get to the heart of the issue. And it certainly would be no silver bullet.

Furthermore, the process for designating taxpayer dollars should be strategic. That was a premise Ann McDonough underscored throughout her run for a seat on the board of supervisors. True to her word on the campaign trail, McDonough didn’t support this spending request because of the way it came about.

The original appropriation to Turning Point was for medication-assisted treatment — something that aimed at reducing the number of heroin users. That’s a different avenue than a needle exchange, which aims to make using drugs safer.

Additionally, the board of health’s opioid committee took its request straight to the supervisors, bypassing the full board of health. In fact, the board of health’s own chairman asked the supervisors to delay the decision until the full board of health had a chance to discuss it. Only McDonough thought that was reasonable.

Given the gravity of the opioid problem today, a needle exchange program won’t be a bad thing for the county to explore. But how county supervisors determine what gets taxpayer funding should be a more deliberate process — no matter what the request.

Editorials reflect the consensus of the Telegraph Herald Editorial Board.