“If you’re an elected official, you need to be transparent with the public,” said Assemblyman Patterson, author of anti-NDA bill AB 1370. “You shouldn’t be signing agreements that give the public’s rights away to know what’s happening on their dime.”
California State Assembly lawmakers are set to consider AB 1370, proposed by California Assemblyman Joe Patterson, on limiting the use of non-disclosure agreements when handling finances from taxpayer dollars or when writing and enacting state laws.
“Right now just raises a lot of questions [as] to what is being kept secret,” Assemblyman Patterson said about the purpose behind his proposal, which is to update the CA Political Reform Act. “If you’re a lawmaker, if you’re an elected official, you need to be transparent with the public.”
AB 1370, having been killed by Democratic leaders twice over the past year, is making headway again in light of a recent discovery of NDAs veiling a suspiciously hushed building project at the State Capitol. A $1.2B effort to renovate the East Annex and build new offices behind the Sacramento Capitol building has been ongoing since 2018, but Democrats have seldom updated the public on its progress.
By Sept, KCRA unearthed a shocking truth that over 2,000 individuals swore to “maintain in strict confidence” any details regarding the building project. After three months of digging, her team dug up the NDA written and the aforementioned list of signees. The memo forewarns harsh “liability, including, but not limited to damages” if violated.
Among the many names bound to this agreement, three sitting legislators were found, including CA Joint Rules Chair Assemblymember Blanca Pacheco, who pleaded that “it was necessary in this instance to protect sensitive information related to the project’s security.”
Democratic leaders have chosen to ignore the controversy rather than admit it. KCRA requested a statement from Democratic Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, who refused to “comment on pending legislative proposals.” Pro Tempore Sen. Mike McGuire replied similarly when also asked, but added that the Assembly “would never require an NDA for bills.”
The Capitol Annex project really was a catalyst to an outcry against NDAs in government affairs. Building up since March 2024, it was revealed Gov Gavin Newsom had authorized NDAs in negotiating with fast food giants on minimum wage, and burner phones to discuss privately on.
“It’s a secret from me too, and I’m elected by my constituents to know these things,” Patterson reiterated to Zavala, clearly impassioned to revive his bill in the face of all this. “You shouldn’t be signing agreements that give away the public’s right to know what’s happening on their dime.”
While the Elections Committee who will be hearing AB 1370 on April 9 have preemptively defended NDAs, arguing that they “protect security and bidding info,” others on the other hand interpret the Capitol Annex NDAs as a blatant violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment.
