Oklahoma Saved $202 Million by Not Imprisoning Drug Users. Counties Got $37.5 Million.

This is Part 2 of a two-part series on Oklahoma's promise to treat addiction instead of jailing it. Part 1: Found at 92 Pounds Under I-40, He Graduated With a 4.0. The Viral Version Leaves Out Who Paid for It.

In November 2016, Oklahoma voters made a deal with themselves.

State Question 780 would stop sending people to prison for simple drug possession and low-level property crimes. State Question 781 would take the money the state saved and send it to counties for mental health care, addiction treatment, housing and diversion.

Stop paying for cells. Start paying for treatment.

The first half worked. According to an August 2025 report by Oklahomans for Criminal Justice Reform, the Oklahoma Policy Institute (OK Policy) and partners, the state saved $202.3 million from reduced incarceration between 2018 and 2025. Drug-related prison admissions fell 77%.

The second half is where the story changes. The same report found $37.5 million had gone to local mental health and substance use services in 44 counties.

Here is the part nobody at the Capitol is going to explain to you: the law let them do that.

The Math

$37,500,000 ÷ $202,300,000 = 18.5%.

By the report's own accounting, fewer than one in five dollars saved has reached a county treatment program.

The gap is not only history. OK Policy's analysis put current savings at about $25 million a year. OK Policy research director Anthony Flores said the state's investment is about half that.

OK Policy's own summary of the delay was blunt: "Implementation has been slow."

Three Words

SQ 781 did not simply order the money moved. The statute says the savings "shall, subject to appropriation by the Legislature, be paid to the County Community Safety Investment Fund."

Read that again. Subject to appropriation.

Here is how that works in practice:

1. A state office calculates how much SQ 780 saved in the prior year. That job belonged to the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) and now belongs to the Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency (LOFT).
2. The Legislature decides whether to put that amount in the budget.
3. If it doesn't, the fund gets nothing. Nobody breaks a law. Counties just go without.

For the first budgets after SQ 780 took effect, that is exactly what happened.

The Fight Over the Number

The first calculation made the stakes clear. OMES put SQ 780 savings at $63.5 million for fiscal year 2018, and $137.8 million from FY 2018 through FY 2026. The Department of Corrections and others, including OK Policy, called the method flawed and inflated.

The number kept dropping. OMES revised FY 2019 savings to $26.8 million. For FY 2020, working with the Department of Corrections and OK Policy, OMES landed at about $10.6 million.

Each revision gave lawmakers another reason to wait. None of them required the Legislature to appropriate zero. It did anyway.

Where the Money Went Instead

In 2019, Gov. Kevin Stitt initially called for $10 million to go into the county fund, according to The Frontier. He then signed a budget that sent the money to the Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (ODMHSAS) for its Smart on Crime Initiative instead.

That money was not wasted. ODMHSAS used it to fund 175 residential addiction treatment beds. A Stitt spokeswoman told The Frontier the choice would best achieve the shared vision behind the reforms.

But it was not what voters passed. SQ 781 sends money to counties, in proportion to population, for programs local officials choose.

Dewey County Sheriff Clay Sander told The Frontier the state initiative had not reached his jail, where he said about half of his 20 to 30 inmates had mental health or substance use problems and the nearest treatment was a 40-minute drive: "we have not seen any benefits from that program."

In 2021, OK Policy reported, the budget again left the fund empty and instead sent $15.5 million to ODMHSAS for other initiatives. OK Policy counted it as the third budget without the investment voters required.

The Timeline

The Problem the Reform Created

We are going to be straight with you: SQ 780 had costs its supporters did not plan for, and the missing money made them worse.

Oklahoma's drug treatment courts were built for felony drug cases, and they are long, demanding programs. Jari Askins, the state's administrative director of courts, told KGOU in 2022 that the threat of a felony was what got people to try them. When that threat disappeared, she said, judges worried "there might not be the hammer to hold over people."

One year after SQ 780 took effect, felony drug possession filings fell 74.4% and misdemeanor possession filings rose 166.3%, according to OK Policy analysis cited by KGOU. The maximum for misdemeanor possession is a year in jail and a $1,000 fine. Against that, Askins said, a long treatment program is a hard sell.

And the short sentence happens in a county jail, not a state prison. Cleveland County Sheriff Todd Gibson told a state council in 2019 that jails were absorbing more people with mental illness and addiction because of the shift from felony to misdemeanor arrests, according to The Frontier.

That is the design flaw in plain terms. SQ 780 shifted much of the burden from state prisons toward county jails. SQ 781 was supposed to send the money after it. For six years, the burden moved and the money did not.

Now It's Up to Your County

Here is what most residents do not know: the money does not show up on its own.

Under ODMHSAS rules, a county has to apply. Stakeholders meet with the county commissioners, set priorities and a budget, and the commissioners approve one proposal for the county. Every county is allocated at least 0.5% of the total appropriation.

The money can pay for community treatment, pretrial diversion, jail screenings and reentry, employment, education and housing programs.

The 2025 report put the cost of these county programs at about $1,424 per person, against roughly $19,000 for a year of incarceration.

As of that report, 33 of Oklahoma's 77 counties had not applied.

What to Do This Week

Your next county commission meeting. Agendas are posted in advance under the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act. Go, or call your commissioner's office, and ask:

1. Has this county applied to the County Community Safety Investment Fund? In which fiscal years?
2. How much was awarded, and what program is it paying for?
3. If we have not applied, why not, and who is responsible for the application?
4. How many people has the program served, and how many stayed out of jail?

File a records request. Under the Oklahoma Open Records Act (51 O.S. § 24A.1 et seq.), ask ODMHSAS for your county's County Community Safety Investment Fund proposals, award letters, statements of work and spending reports for fiscal years 2024 through 2026. ODMHSAS takes fund questions at 781info@odmhsas.ok.gov.

Ask your legislator one question. Does the FY 2027 appropriation to the fund match LOFT's savings calculation? If not, what is the difference, and where did it go?

Voters kept their end of the deal in 2016.

The savings showed up. The money is still catching up.

Editor's Note

Savings, investment and county participation figures are drawn from "Investing in Justice: The Promise and Progress of Oklahoma's SQ 781 Community Safety Fund," released Aug. 8, 2025 by Oklahomans for Criminal Justice Reform with Arnold Ventures, Healthy Minds Policy Initiative, OK Policy and DataWorks, as summarized by OK Policy. The quotations and characterizations attributed to Gov. Kevin Stitt's office, Sheriff Clay Sander and Sheriff Todd Gibson are drawn from The Frontier's Feb. 5, 2020 report. The quotation attributed to Jari Askins is drawn from KGOU's Jan. 6, 2022 report. The statutory language is quoted as reported by the Tulsa World on Jan. 19, 2020.

No allegation of unlawful conduct is made against the Legislature, the Governor or any state agency. SQ 781 made its funding subject to appropriation, and declining to appropriate was lawful. That is precisely the problem this article describes.

This article is not legal advice.

Corrections: ron@guerrilla.news

Sources

1. Groundbreaking report reveals more than $200 million in savings from Oklahoma justice reform – Oklahoma Policy Institute, Aug. 8, 2025. okpolicy.org
2. New Report Release: Investing in Justice – Oklahomans for Criminal Justice Reform. okjusticereform.org
3. In The Know: New report shows how 2016 justice reform efforts are working – Oklahoma Policy Institute, Aug. 2025. okpolicy.org
4. SQ 780 and SQ 781 – Oklahoma Policy Institute. okpolicy.org
5. The voters made a promise with SQ 781; the Legislature has yet to fulfill it – Tulsa World, Jan. 19, 2020. tulsaworld.com
6. The official SQ 780 savings calculation rests on flawed assumptions – Oklahoma Policy Institute, Sept. 6, 2018. okpolicy.org
7. Smart Justice Reform Act (SQ 781) FY 2020 Calculations Report – Office of Management and Enterprise Services. oklahoma.gov
8. Follow through on SQ 781 by funding treatment and rehabilitation services – NonDoc, May 2021. nondoc.com
9. Five years later: Voters still waiting for SQ 781's investments – Oklahoma Policy Institute, June 25, 2021. okpolicy.org
10. For those struggling with addiction or mental health, Oklahoma jails can be deadly – The Frontier, Feb. 5, 2020. readfrontier.org
11. Unintended consequence of SQ 780 may impact access to drug treatment courts – KGOU, Jan. 6, 2022. kgou.org
12. Engrossed Senate Bill 844 – Oklahoma Legislature, 2023. oklegislature.gov
13. Oklahoma SQ 781 & the County Community Safety Investment Fund – Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services. oklahoma.gov