Peer leaders tell CFC committee BHSA funding shift is forcing layoffs and cuts in peer-run services

Invited peer leaders and operators told the Client, Family, Community Inclusion advisory committee that the state's transition from the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) to the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) is producing immediate and severe impacts on peer-run organizations.

Katah Salami Tamplin, a peer in recovery and longtime peer leader, said the shift of prevention funding to the state level under BHSA reduces county-level prevention capacity and threatens the locally rooted services that keep people out of crisis. She told the committee prevention at the local level "is vital" and warned the restructured funding would have an "unprecedented" statewide effect.

Katrina, representing a wellness center in Alameda County, said peer-run organizations in her region were "100% defunded" or otherwise deeply cut. She described the loss of employment and program capacity at community wellness centers and warned of increased emergency-department and criminal-justice contacts when open-door peer services disappear.

Mark Salazar, CEO of the Mental Health Association of San Francisco, described his organization's recent service volumes and rapid budget contraction after funding shifted from general funds to BHSA. He told the committee that from July 2022 to June 2025 his warm line handled very large call volumes and that the organization laid off roughly 200 staff after funding changes reduced service capacity and hours. "We laid off about 200 folks," he told the committee.

Speakers and public commenters provided county-level examples: Katah said Alameda County faced roughly $53,000,000 of programs that would need to be closed or reduced; Mark Salazar said BHSA revenues were down 40' to 45% compared with the prior year in some jurisdictions and warned thousands of nonprofits would compete for a much smaller prevention pot under BHSA.

Multiple public commenters from across the state echoed those warnings: organizations in rural counties described access problems if peer centers close; peer specialists and community leaders urged the commission to press the governor and Legislature for transitional funding; and several speakers noted that Medi-Cal billing is not a one-for-one substitute for the current peer-centered, low-barrier wellness model.

Committee members and staff discussed near-term next steps: the chair committed to include the public remarks in a transmittal to the full commission, and several members requested that grants or the Innovation Partnership Fund be directed to support peer-run organizations during the transition. Members also proposed listening sessions and additional briefings to gather details (which counties and programs are affected and by how much) before the March 26 full commission meeting.

The committee adjourned the official meeting and signaled a separate listening session would continue to collect testimony and names of affected programs; staff will send follow-up emails and prepare a transmittal to the commission.