Assembly Concurrent Resolution 23 is a ceremonial measure that honors the role of people with lived experience in supporting peers through recovery and health. The resolution records legislative findings about the value of peer support, the need to boost civic engagement among peers, and the potential for certified Medi‑Cal peer support specialists to alleviate parts of California’s behavioral health workforce shortage.
Although the measure does not create funding or regulatory mandates, it formally signals legislative support for peer roles as California implements the Behavioral Health Services Act and expands Medi‑Cal peer support certification. For stakeholders tracking workforce development, county behavioral health planning, or advocacy leverage, the resolution is a public recognition that could be used to promote hiring, outreach, and awareness efforts.
At a Glance
What It Does
ACR 23 adopts legislative findings about peer support and issues a formal recognition of peers during a week in May 2025; it concludes with an instruction for the Assembly Chief Clerk to transmit copies of the resolution to the author. The resolution is chaptered (Chapter 87) and contains no appropriation or regulatory directive.
Who It Affects
The measure primarily speaks to peers (individuals with lived behavioral health experience), county behavioral health agencies, advocates and peer workforce trainers, and Medi‑Cal program managers responsible for peer support certification and deployment. It also signals priorities for legislators and local decisionmakers who plan behavioral health services.
Why It Matters
As a symbolic act, the resolution elevates peer voice during a period of policy change — potentially strengthening advocacy for peer hiring, certification uptake, and inclusion in planning. It also formalizes legislative findings that stakeholders can cite when seeking programmatic or budgetary support.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The text is a concurrent resolution that compiles a series of factual findings about the function and value of peers in behavioral health systems: who peers are, how they use lived experience to engage others, and their role in informing policymakers. It frames peer civic engagement as a means to ensure policy decisions reflect lived experience and mentions the Behavioral Health Services Act as the broader policy context for system change.
The resolution highlights Medi‑Cal peer support specialists as a trained category of provider whose skills can help address workforce shortfalls at the county level. It does not create new certification rules, alter Medi‑Cal regulations, or authorize spending; its concrete instruction is procedural (distributing copies of the resolution).
That means its immediate legal effect is nil, but its findings are a written record of legislative intent and priorities.Practically, recipients (advocates, counties, and program managers) can use the resolution as an advocacy tool — for example, to justify pilot programs, outreach campaigns, or local hiring initiatives focused on peers. Because the measure is public and chaptered, it can be cited in grant applications, county board agendas, or policy packets to show state-level recognition of peer roles.Finally, by couching the recognition inside the state’s broad behavioral health reform effort, the text signals that lawmakers view peer workforce expansion as part of system transformation.
The resolution therefore functions as a low-cost way to elevate an operational priority (peer engagement and certification) without altering statutory or fiscal frameworks.
The Five Things You Need to Know
ACR 23 is a concurrent resolution (chaptered as Chapter 87) that records legislative findings about peer support and concludes with a directive to transmit copies to the author.
The resolution specifically links peer roles to the state’s Behavioral Health Services Act and references Medi‑Cal peer support specialists as a trained workforce category.
The measure contains no appropriation, regulatory change, or enforcement mechanism—its effect is declarative and ceremonial, not binding.
The document was filed with the Secretary of State on June 25, 2025 and is intended to coincide with National Mental Health Awareness Month.
The resolution emphasizes increasing peer civic engagement and the potential for peers to inform policy, but it does not create new programmatic requirements for counties or Medi‑Cal.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Findings on peers, lived experience, and workforce context
The preamble collects factual statements: peers bring lived experience and empathy, can guide policymakers, and support recovery. It also records that California faces a behavioral health workforce shortage and positions certified Medi‑Cal peer support specialists as part of the workforce solution. These clauses do not create substantive rights but frame the Legislature’s view of current problems and potential contributions from peers.
Formal recognition directive
This single operative clause directs that the Legislature recognizes a specified week in May 2025 as Mental Health Peer Appreciation Week. As a resolution, this is a formal statement of legislative sentiment rather than a statute imposing duties, funding, or regulatory changes. The practical effect is to provide an official, public endorsement that stakeholders may cite.
Administrative follow-up
The resolution instructs the Chief Clerk of the Assembly to transmit copies to the author for distribution. That is the only administrative action mandated by the measure and establishes how the Legislature expects the recognition to be disseminated, but it carries no implementation timetable or reporting requirement.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Healthcare across all five countries.
Explore Healthcare 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
- Peers and peer support specialists — the resolution elevates their role in public discourse, potentially helping advocacy efforts for hiring, certification programs, and local recognition.
- Peer advocacy organizations and trainers — they gain a state‑chaptered statement they can cite when seeking grants, partnerships, or county engagement for peer workforce development.
- County behavioral health agencies — the public endorsement may strengthen justification for recruiting and funding peer positions in local service arrays.
- Medi‑Cal program managers — legislative findings referencing Medi‑Cal peer support certification can be used to prioritize outreach and certification pipelines within existing budgets.
Who Bears the Cost
- County behavioral health agencies — while the resolution creates no mandate, counties may face pressure to expand peer hiring or programs, implying operational costs for recruitment, supervision, and training.
- Medi‑Cal administrators and certifying bodies — increased demand for certification and oversight could require reallocating staff time or modest administrative resources.
- Advocacy groups — expectations to organize recognition activities during the designated week may impose volunteer or staff workload without new funding.
- Legislative staff and the Assembly Clerk’s office — minimal administrative cost to publish and transmit the resolution, though these are routine and not budgeted in the measure.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The core dilemma is between symbolic recognition and practical capacity: the Legislature endorses peer roles to signal priority, but without funding or mandates the resolution may raise expectations that cannot be met by existing county budgets, Medi‑Cal certification capacity, or workforce pipelines.
The resolution’s strength is symbolic: it compiles findings and issues a public endorsement. That means its leverage depends on how stakeholders use it.
Without accompanying funding, programmatic directives, or timelines, the resolution cannot directly expand the workforce, expedite Medi‑Cal certification, or require counties to hire peers. The practical gap between recognition and resource allocation creates an implementation question: will local agencies treat the resolution as a prompt for action or as a ceremonial gesture?
Another tension concerns expectations. The resolution highlights peers as a way to mitigate workforce shortages, but scaling a trained peer workforce requires investments in recruitment, competency‑based training, supervision structures, and sustained funding for positions.
If policymakers cite the resolution as justification for rapid expansion without addressing these enabling elements, counties could face mismatched expectations and constrained implementation. Finally, there is a risk of tokenism—formal recognition can be used to claim progress while leaving systemic barriers to meaningful peer integration untouched.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.