Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Settlement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House creates opioid settlement fund committee to distribute settlement proceeds after debate over appropriation authority
Summary
The House passed legislation creating a 15‑member Opioid Settlement Fund Committee to design grant rules and oversee distribution of opioid settlement dollars. Several lawmakers pressed for legislative oversight and public hearings; sponsors said distributions still require legislative approval. The bill passed on the floor.
The Mississippi House on Thursday approved a bill to create an Opioid Settlement Fund Committee to manage the distribution and grant rules for opioid‑related settlement money the state is receiving from national litigation. Sponsors and proponents said the committee is intended to oversee disbursement for abatement programs, treatment, prevention and related public‑health activities.
Debate on the floor centered on two recurring concerns: whether the committee would supplant the Legislature’s appropriation authority, and whether the committee’s processes would include public hearings and clear audit/oversight mechanisms. Representative Jones and several other members urged that the Legislature retain appropriations authority and that grant decisions be transparent; the bill’s sponsor responded that committee recommendations would still come before the Legislature for approval and that meetings would be open to the public.
The bill lays out a 15‑member committee including the state health officer, the executive director of the State Board of Mental Health, the superintendent of public education, the administrative director of the courts, representatives of municipal and county associations, the attorney general’s appointee, and legislative public health chairs. The sponsor said existing settlement receipts total roughly $203 million and that, under the settlement, 15% goes to participating cities and counties with the remainder overseen by the state committee.
Several members requested hearings and annual reports. The bill requires an annual financial report to the Legislature and mandates that committee rules align with settlement terms. Opponents argued the structure risked delegating too much allocation authority outside the legislative appropriations process; supporters said the committee is intended to be a technical body that would recommend disbursements for legislative approval.
The measure passed on the floor; the roll call showed 76 yeas and 36 nays.
Ending: Lawmakers who opposed the measure said they would press for additional oversight language and public hearings as the committee forms its grant rules; the House vote sends the new committee structure to the Senate.
