Senate panel advances S.2 to consolidate mental‑health, disability and substance‑use functions; witnesses press for stronger oversight

The Senate Medical Affairs Subcommittee advanced Senate Bill 2 (S.2), a measure to consolidate several state health‑related agencies into a cabinet‑level department, after adopting a series of amendments and hearing testimony from families, disability advocates and policy groups during a subcommittee meeting. The panel voted to report the bill favorably to the full committee as amended.

Supporters and witnesses said the reorganization aims to improve coordination and accountability among agencies that deliver services to people with mental illness, developmental disabilities and substance‑use disorders. Several family members and advocates urged more explicit oversight and enforcement provisions in the legislation, citing past problems they described with how appropriated funds and facility incidents were handled.

Miss Harrison, a citizen witness who testified earlier in the hearing, told the subcommittee that money appropriated for regional centers was sometimes diverted for other uses and that “there need to be some oversight, ongoing oversight by this committee.” She said audits and reports have documented abuse and obstructed reviews and that current enforcement mechanisms have not produced consequences for responsible officials. “The problem was that the governor was controlling the commissioners and telling them what to do,” Harrison said. She also urged advisory councils that include parents and affected persons, and called for clearer annual accounting of how money is spent across service categories.

Rob Wilkie, a parent from Inman, described a May incident involving his son that he said highlighted systemic failures in incident reporting and investigation. Wilkie said the regional center reported the injuries to SLED, the complaint reached an ombudsman after delay and a subsequent criminal investigation occurred weeks later, when visible bruising had faded. “My son came out beat up and bridal,” Wilkie said, and later described receiving a SLED report that stated “no indication of abuse” after his FOIA request.

Beth Franco, executive director of Disability Rights South Carolina, told the panel that many people who need services are dually diagnosed or face multiple, overlapping needs. Franco said an Olmstead‑style, comprehensive plan should include multiple agencies and the voices of people who receive services. “If you create a good plan, and it's comprehensive, and you have the voice of the people that are behind it, it needs…accountability that it's going to move forward,” she said.

Orin Smith of the Palmetto Promise Institute framed S.2 as part of a long history of recommended government reorganization in South Carolina and argued consolidation can reduce duplication and improve service delivery. “The merger of these 3 agencies is a reform whose time has come,” Smith said, and urged that accountability and oversight measures be preserved.

On the bill text, the subcommittee adopted multiple amendments before reporting S.2 to the full Medical Affairs Committee. Adopted changes included: - Renaming the successor office for substance‑use services to the Office of Substance Abuse Services. - Adding a requirement that the new department director implement or access collaboration technology to improve communication within the new agency and with contracted providers so services paid for with public funds are actually delivered. - Revising regulatory language so the consolidated agency promulgates regulations in the same manner as other cabinet agencies. - Adding an Olmstead‑related provision to require a comprehensive, multi‑agency plan for moving eligible individuals into community‑based services and to tie planning to implementation and funding. - A procedural amendment that limited the subcommittee vote to sections 1–14 and 25–31 of S.2, with sections 15–24 (described by members as “medical freedom” items) to be handled in a separate legislative vehicle and public process.

The panel also discussed personnel provisions in the bill that exempt certain senior positions — the director and employees who report directly to the director — from state employee grievance procedures. At least one senator said he supports keeping the director exempt but asked staff to draft alternative language so lower‑level employees are not removed from grievance rights without further debate.

After debate and the series of adopted amendments, the subcommittee chair announced that S.2, as amended, would be reported favorably to the full Medical Affairs Committee.

The hearing included repeated calls from witnesses for ongoing legislative oversight — not only structural changes — and for advisory bodies, clearer spending reports, and accountability mechanisms tied to investigations and audits. Lawmakers said oversight would include routine budget reviews, the Senate Oversight Committee and opportunities for sworn testimony if problems persist.

The subcommittee took no final vote on the omitted sections (15–24) during this meeting; members said those issues would be the subject of separate hearings and a different bill. The full committee will next receive the subcommittee's amended S.2 for further consideration.