ACR 13 is a ceremonial concurrent resolution that recognizes the International Day of Peace and calls for its observance on September 21, 2025. The text recites the UN origin of the observance, underscores themes such as cease‑fires and humanitarian action, and frames the day as an opportunity for reflection, education, and community events.
The resolution is symbolic: it does not create legal rights, funding, or regulatory duties. Its practical effect is to give state and local actors, educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations an explicit state‑level endorsement they can use when scheduling programs, outreach, or commemorations.
At a Glance
What It Does
The measure adopts a nonbinding concurrent resolution recognizing the International Day of Peace and articulating the day’s purpose and themes. It includes historical background on the UN observance and highlights symbols like the UN Peace Bell.
Who It Affects
State and local governments, K–12 schools and higher‑education institutions, nonprofit peace and humanitarian organizations, and cultural institutions that plan public programming or outreach tied to recognized observances. The Legislature and Assembly staff handle the administrative steps tied to the resolution’s distribution.
Why It Matters
Even though the resolution has no regulatory or fiscal effect, it establishes an official state position that organizations can cite when seeking partners, scheduling events, or framing educational programming. For compliance officers and public affairs teams, it clarifies the preferred date and themes for state‑aligned activities.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
ACR 13 takes the form of a concurrent resolution — the Legislature’s established vehicle for formal statements of position or recognition. As a concurrent resolution, it does not amend the California Codes, does not appropriate funds, and does not create enforceable duties.
Its legal footprint is limited to the legislative record and whatever administrative actions follow from members or staff who choose to distribute copies.
Substantively, the text summarizes the United Nations’ 1981 establishment of the International Day of Peace and explains why that observance is relevant to California audiences: it links peace to justice, human rights, and humanitarian pauses in conflict. That language provides the rationale that schools, local governments, and nonprofits will likely use when designing curricula, events, or public messaging tied to the day.Operationally, the resolution assigns clerical steps to the Assembly (the bill directs transmission of copies for distribution); it places no new reporting, budgeting, or programmatic requirements on agencies.
The legislative finding that there is no fiscal impact makes clear that state budget offices and fiscal committees do not expect follow‑on appropriations. In practice, any coordinated state participation will depend on separate administrative decisions or voluntary activity by agencies and third‑party organizations.For institutions that manage calendars, communications, or grant applications, the practical upshot is clarity: the Legislature has formally flagged a date and themes.
That flag can influence event scheduling, fundraising appeals, and partnership outreach, but it does not create entitlement to state funding or require agencies to act.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The resolution cites the United Nations’ 1981 unanimous resolution that established the International Day of Peace.
The text highlights the UN Peace Bell and emphasizes the day’s role in promoting cease‑fires and humanitarian efforts as focal points for observance.
The measure references recent themes (for example, 2024’s “Cultivating a Culture of Peace”) to encourage collaboration among governments, organizations, and communities.
The resolution directs the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies to the author for appropriate distribution to interested parties.
The measure was chaptered as Chapter 189 and filed with the Secretary of State on September 22, 2025; the Legislature’s fiscal review indicates no fiscal committee referral or anticipated fiscal impact.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Statement of purpose and UN background
This opening section summarizes the historical and normative basis for the observance — citing the UN’s 1981 resolution and describing symbolic practices such as the UN Peace Bell. Practically, the preamble frames the Legislature’s reasons for recognition (peace, human rights, humanitarian pauses) and provides the rhetorical justification organizations will use when aligning programs with the observance.
Formal recognition and call to observe
This operative clause contains the Legislature's formal expression of recognition and the designation of the observance date. While expressed as a proclamation, the language is hortatory: it urges reflection and cooperation but imposes no statutory obligations, reporting requirements, or new administrative duties on state agencies.
Transmission instruction to Assembly clerks
A short administrative provision instructs the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to send copies of the resolution to the author for distribution. This is a ministerial step that determines how the text is circulated to stakeholders (schools, local governments, nonprofits) rather than a directive creating programmatic duties or funding avenues.
Official record and fiscal notation
The resolution records its filing with the Secretary of State and is chaptered, which means the text becomes part of the official legislative record. The accompanying fiscal notation in the document indicates no identified fiscal impact, signaling that budgetary authorities did not identify expenses tied directly to the resolution itself.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Nonprofit peace and humanitarian organizations — They gain a state‑level endorsement they can cite in outreach and fundraising materials, which can help attract partners and public attention for September 21 events.
- K–12 schools and higher‑education institutions — The resolution provides a concrete, legislatively recognized date and themes that educators can incorporate into curricula, assemblies, and campus programming without having to justify alignment with state priorities.
- Local governments and cultural institutions — City parks, libraries, and museums planning public programs can use the proclamation as a rationale for scheduling observances and seeking community partners.
- Advocacy and community groups focused on human rights and conflict resolution — The legislative recognition amplifies messaging around cease‑fires, humanitarian action, and community reconciliation work.
Who Bears the Cost
- Assembly and author’s office staff — They handle the clerical tasks of distributing copies and responding to inquiries; those duties are minor but require staff time.
- Local governments and nonprofits that choose to organize events — Any programming tied to the day will typically rely on existing budgets or new fundraising; the resolution does not provide state funding.
- State agencies asked to participate voluntarily — If agencies elect to mark the day with events or communications, they must absorb any personnel or outreach costs within existing resources.
- Event partners and venues — Community organizations and cultural venues that host commemorations bear venue, logistics, and personnel costs unless they secure outside funding or sponsorships.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The core tension is symbolic recognition versus concrete action: the resolution publicly endorses peace observance and elevates related themes, but it provides no funding or mandate to turn symbolism into organized, statewide programming — leaving advocates to decide whether symbolic recognition is sufficient or whether it creates an expectation of tangible support the state did not commit to provide.
The resolution’s principal limitation is its symbolic form. By design, concurrent resolutions express legislative sentiment without creating enforceable duties or allocating resources; that preserves budgetary control but can create mismatched expectations.
Stakeholders who read a formal legislative proclamation may reasonably expect increased coordination or funding; the resolution itself contains no mechanism to deliver either.
Another tension arises from proliferation: legislatures routinely adopt commemorative days, which can dilute the impact of any single observance and create a crowded calendar for public agencies and nonprofits. Because the resolution places no coordination burden on a particular state agency, any coherent statewide programming depends on voluntary action or separate administrative directives.
That ad hoc path risks uneven observance across jurisdictions and may leave smaller organizations bearing disproportionate costs to participate.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.