DFA; eliminate the position of Coordinator of Mental Health Accessibility within.
Summary
Senate Bill 2889 would repeal six sections of the Mississippi Code that created the position of Coordinator of Mental Health Accessibility within the Department of Finance and Administration (DFA). Those repealed sections also set out how the coordinator is appointed, the qualifications for the job, salary and expense provisions, the coordinator’s powers and duties, and requirements for cooperation from other state agencies.
In practical terms, the bill eliminates the statutory framework for that DFA position and removes the related duties and inter-agency coordination requirements from state law. If enacted, the state would no longer have this legislatively created mental health accessibility coordinator role under those code sections, and any responsibilities tied specifically to that office would be ended unless reassigned elsewhere by separate legislation or administrative action.
Impact
The bill would amend Mississippi law by repealing Sections 41-20-1, 41-20-3, 41-20-5, 41-20-7, 41-20-9, and 41-20-11 of the Mississippi Code of 1972. These provisions currently establish the Coordinator of Mental Health Accessibility within DFA and govern the office’s appointment, compensation, authority, and agency-cooperation requirements. Repeal would remove the statutory basis for the position and its associated mandates, affecting DFA and any state agencies that were required to work with the coordinator.
Sentiment
Based on the available context, the bill appears administrative and structural rather than policy-expanding, with no recorded committee debate or votes provided. The caption indicates an intent to eliminate an existing DFA position, suggesting a likely focus on government reorganization or streamlining rather than a contested substantive policy change. Because there are no transcripts or vote records, there is no documented public sentiment in the materials beyond the bill’s straightforward repeal purpose.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the elimination of the Coordinator of Mental Health Accessibility position itself. Supporters of repeal may view the office as unnecessary duplication, while opponents could argue that removing the position weakens state coordination on mental health access issues. The bill text does not include arguments from either side, and no committee discussion or voting history is available to show which concerns were raised or by whom.