Backers of Issue 1 say battle far from over,

Ohio voters reject lighter sentences for drug offenders.

State Issue 1 failed convincingly Tuesday, but changes could be coming in the way low-level drug offenses are handled in Ohio’s criminal justice system.

“We always knew that, win or lose, the Yes on Issue 1 campaign is the beginning, not the end,” said Dennis Willard, spokesperson for the Yes on Issue 1 campaign, on Tuesday evening. “Our opponents may celebrate tonight, but tomorrow they will wake up with the same crisis on their hands, and not one step closer to real solutions.”

Paul Pfeifer, executive director of the Ohio Judi- cial Council, which opposed the measure, put out a letter advocating changes.

“Undeniable are the bar- riers to meaningful employment and suitable housing when one acquires a felony conviction,” the letter says. “For addicts those barriers represent a formula for failure in recovery. Guidance from the judiciary for sensible next steps will be expected by a new governor and the General Assembly.”

Mike DeWine, the governor-elect who will take office in January, previously said he wants to create at least 60 more drug courts to promote treatment in lieu of incar- ceration for drug offenders.

Groups that pushed for Issue 1, including Policy Mat- ters Ohio, vowed to work with the new administra- tion to accomplish sentencing reform and achieve the goal of incarcerating fewer Ohioans.

“Many observers claimed that they supported the goals behind Issue 1 but not the mechanism,” the group said in a statement. “Policy Mat- ters will work with those Ohioans, across party lines, to accomplish sentencing reform through legislative means.”

Because Issue 1 failed, a law that went into effect Oct. 31 reducing the amount of fentanyl needed to trigger a high-level felony charge will remain intact. Senate Bill 1 made possessing between 50 and 100 unit doses of fentanyl — or 5 to 10 grams — a third-degree felony charge, down from a minimum of 20 grams.

Backers of Issue 1 out-raised opponents, bringing in $9.8 million, plus another $1.4 mil- lion in in-kind support. Nearly $6 million of that money came from out of state nonprofits, including Chan Zuckerberg Advocacy and the Tides Center. Less than $4,000 came from inside Ohio.

Opponents raised $1 mil- lion and most of it came from Ohioans for a Healthy Econ- omy, a nonprofit issue advo- cacy group.

In the end, nearly twothirds of Ohio voters opposed the proposed constitutional amendment, which called for lessening penalties for peo- ple convicted of low-level drug offenses.

More than 63 percent of voters opposed the amendment to just 37 percent in favor, according to final, unofficial results.

The measure would have changed Ohio law with the goal of promoting treatment of drug addiction instead of incarceration. But opponents raised concerns about the impact removing the threat of punishment would have on Ohio’s drug courts.

“Thankfully, the voters of Ohio have turned down Issue 1,” said Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, who vocally opposed the measure. “Their no vote means that those before the court due to addiction can continue to take advantage of the programs, including drug court, that offer treatment, accountability and a road to recovery.”

Supporters of the measure declared victory Tuesday, saying it was important to get the conversation started about criminal justice reform.

“Together we made sure that the insane reality of criminalizing poor people and people with addiction and mental illness was in the conversation and challenged,” said Demareo Cooper of the Ohio Organizing Collaborative in a letter to supporters. “We refused to allow this year’s election to ignore the crisis of addiction and mental illness faced by thousands of Ohioans.”