California bill advances to make it a crime for the governor, state officials to use NDAs when lawmaking

SECRECY AGREEMENTS. WE’RE TAKING A LIVE LOOK HERE AT THE STATE CAPITOL, AND A NEW BILL FILED JUST TODAY WOULD PROHIBIT THE GOVERNOR AND HIS ADMINISTRATION FROM SIGNING OR REQUESTING ANYONE TO SIGN NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS. NDAS WHEN CREATING NEW CALIFORNIA LAWS, OR DETERMINING HOW TO SPEND YOUR MONEY. TAXPAYER DOLLARS. THE BILL IS IN DIRECT RESPONSE TO OUR REPORTING ON HOW CALIFORNIA’S GOVERNMENT HAS USED THEM, OR ENCOURAGED GROUPS TO USE THESE NDAS ON THE TAXPAYER DIME. KCRA THREE POLITICAL DIRECTOR ASHLEY ZAVALA EXPOSED THIS ISSUE AND HAS BEEN REPORTING ON THIS NOW FOR YEARS. ASHLEY. AND HERE WE ARE TODAY. SHE JOINS US WITH THE PROPOSAL. GALSTON, CALIFORNIA LAWMAKER WELL, CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS AND THE GOVERNOR LAST YEAR AGREED TO MAKE THIS A CRIME, BUT SPECIFICALLY FOR STATE LAWMAKERS ONLY. NOW, THE SAME ASSEMBLYMAN WHO WROTE THAT LAW SAYS THE GOVERNOR AND OTHER STATE OFFICIALS SHOULD BE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARD. ALL OF THIS COMES AFTER WE EXPOSED HOW CALIFORNIA’S GOVERNMENT HAS EITHER USED NDAS OR ENCOURAGED THEIR USE TO KEEP INFORMATION SECRET ABOUT THE STATE’S LANDMARK FAST FOOD LAW AND BILLION DOLLAR CAPITOL ANNEX PROJECT. FROM CALIFORNIA’S LANDMARK $20 FAST FOOD MINIMUM WAGE LAW TO CALIFORNIA’S EXPENSIVE CAPITOL ANNEX PROJECT, THERE IS KEY INFORMATION SURROUNDING BOTH THAT STATE LEADERS ARE KEEPING UNDER WRAPS. WHY INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TODAY TO BAN THE ADMINISTRATION AND ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS WITHIN THE ADMINISTRATION FROM SIGNING NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS? NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS ARE CONTRACTS THAT LEGALLY FORCE PEOPLE TO KEEP QUIET. REPUBLICAN ASSEMBLYMAN JOE PATTERSON, AIMING TO MAKE IT A CRIME FOR THIS KIND OF GOVERNMENT SECRECY. WHEN LEADERS MAKE NEW STATE LAWS OR DECIDE HOW TO USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS. ESPECIALLY THE ADMINISTRATION WITH THEY ARE INVOLVED IN THE NEGOTIATIONS FOR EVERY MAJOR PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT PASSES OUT OF CALIFORNIA. PATTERSON PROPOSAL COMES AFTER KCRA THREE FIRST REPORTED THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OVERSAW THE USE OF NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS IN THE NEGOTIATIONS OF THE STATE’S FAST FOOD LABOR LAW. THE AGREEMENTS, SIGNED BY MAJOR FAST FOOD CORPORATIONS AND LEADERS OF THE LABOR GROUP SEIU CALIFORNIA. IT CAUGHT RESTAURANT FRANCHISEES OFF GUARD. I WAS SPECIFICALLY TOLD THAT A NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT WAS IN PLACE, AND THAT THAT WE WEREN’T ALLOWED TO KNOW ABOUT IT. WHO IS IT UNDER YOUR UNDERSTANDING? WHO WAS IT THAT WANTED THE NDAS TO BE SIGNED? I HONESTLY AM NOT ENTIRELY SURE. I WAS TOLD AT ONE POINT THAT THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE WAS REQUIRING NDAS. I’VE ALSO BEEN TOLD OTHER POINTS THAT THE SEIU. I WOULD SAY IT’S THE SEIU. WERE YOU A SIGNEE OF AN NDA IN THIS? I WOULD PREFER NOT TO COMMENT. I CONFRONTED AN SEIU LEADER THAT SPRING. YOU KNOW, WE WERE AT A PLACE WHERE WE MET IMPASSE IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS. WHY SHOULD NDAS BE USED IN THAT PROCESS? AND I THINK WHAT HAPPENED ABSOLUTELY BENEFITS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WE ALSO FIRST REPORTED NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS ARE SHIELDING INFORMATION ON CALIFORNIA’S BILLION DOLLAR AND COUNTING CAPITAL ANNEX PROJECT. STATE LAWMAKERS FOR YEARS HAVE BEEN FORCING THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO SIGN THEM TO KEEP BROAD INFORMATION ABOUT THE TAXPAYER FUNDED PROJECT A SECRET. DOZENS OF PEOPLE IN GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM’S ADMINISTRATION SIGNED THEM. PROJECT LEADERS HAVE SAID IT’S FOR SECURITY PURPOSES AND TO PROTECT BID INFORMATION. WHY NOT CHANGE THIS NDA TO SAY WHAT THE TWO OF YOU ARE SAYING RIGHT NOW ABOUT SECURITY AND BIDS? THESE ARE DRAFTED BY LEGAL COUNSEL. AND SO I CANNOT SAY WHY LEGAL COUNSEL WOULD DRAFT IT IN SUCH A MANNER. MEANWHILE, PATTERSON HOPEFUL ABOUT THE FUTURE OF HIS PROPOSAL. WE SHOULDN’T BE SIGNING SECRET AGREEMENTS, THE RIGHT OF THE PUBLIC TO KNOW WHAT’S GOING ON IN A PUBLIC PROCESS SHOULDN’T BE SIGNING AWAY THEIR RIGHTS AND SAYING, HEY, I LEGALLY HAVE TO KEEP A SECRET FROM YOU. YOU KNOW? SO THAT’S JUST WRONG. A SPOKESMAN FOR THE GOVERNOR IN RESPONSE TO THIS SAID THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE DOES NOT SIGN NDAS FOR LEGISLATION, SO THIS WOULDN’T CHANGE ANYTHING FOR THEM. THEY ALSO NOTED T

California Assembly passes bill to make it a crime for the governor, state officials to use NDAs when lawmaking

Updated: 12:39 PM PDT Apr 16, 2026

Editorial Standards ⓘ

The California Assembly unanimously approved a proposal Thursday to make it a crime for the state’s governor and top officials in the administration from signing or requesting anyone to sign nondisclosure agreements when creating new state laws and determining how to use taxpayer dollars. The bill, AB 1652, now heads to the State Senate for consideration. (Previous coverage in the video above.)While the proposal has so far received an overwhelming amount of support, Democratic legislative leaders have yet to publicly speak about the proposal. Assembly leaders placed the bill on the “consent calendar,” meaning it’s approved in a long list of bills that also have unanimous support.Nondisclosure agreements are contracts that legally force people to keep information a secret. Assemblyman Joe Patterson, R-Rocklin, filed the legislation this year in direct response to KCRA 3’s reporting on how California’s government has either used them or allowed groups to use them on the taxpayers’ dime.”I am pleased that my colleagues unanimously and unambiguously supported my legislation to clarify that government officials – including the Governor’s office and members of the administration – should not create legally binding agreements to keep the public in the dark as it discusses legislation,” Patterson said in a statement to KCRA 3 on Thursday. “The legislative process is intended to be transparent and include members of the public, not exclude them. It’s great that my colleagues agree with this.”In 2024, KCRA 3 reported that the governor’s office allowed nondisclosure agreements to keep secret the negotiations of a state law that raised the minimum wage for fast-food workers to $20 an hour. State lawmakers and other key voices later admitted they were entirely left out of the conversation. Newsom’s allowed NDAs to cover the secret talks at the insistence of a major labor organization, SEIU California. Newsom’s office has said neither the governor nor his staff signed them. Since then, no one has been able to explain the bakery exemption, but multiple sources have told KCRA 3 it was for one of the governor’s billionaire donors, who is also a Panera franchisee. Harsh Ghai, one of the largest operators of Burger King restaurants in the country, told KCRA 3 he was left in the dark about the law because of the use of NDAs. Joseph Bryant, an SEIU official who is also a member of California’s Fast-Food Council, which is meant to set the wages and working conditions for the workers across the state, would not confirm or deny that he signed the NDA. KCRA 3 was also the first to report the government’s use of NDAs in the California Legislature’s construction of a new $1 billion and counting office building for state lawmakers and the governor. The Legislature directed 2,000 people, including five state lawmakers and dozens of people in the governor’s administration, to sign NDAs to keep broad information about the Capitol Annex project secret.Newsom’s spokesperson has said the office does not sign NDAs for legislation, so Patterson’s bill would not impact the office. California lawmakers and the governor last year approved a similar state law that now makes it a crime for lawmakers to sign or ask anyone to sign NDAs while using taxpayer dollars. See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel

SACRAMENTO, Calif. —

The California Assembly unanimously approved a proposal Thursday to make it a crime for the state’s governor and top officials in the administration from signing or requesting anyone to sign nondisclosure agreements when creating new state laws and determining how to use taxpayer dollars.

The bill, AB 1652, now heads to the State Senate for consideration.

(Previous coverage in the video above.)

While the proposal has so far received an overwhelming amount of support, Democratic legislative leaders have yet to publicly speak about the proposal. Assembly leaders placed the bill on the “consent calendar,” meaning it’s approved in a long list of bills that also have unanimous support.

Nondisclosure agreements are contracts that legally force people to keep information a secret. Assemblyman Joe Patterson, R-Rocklin, filed the legislation this year in direct response to KCRA 3’s reporting on how California’s government has either used them or allowed groups to use them on the taxpayers’ dime.

“I am pleased that my colleagues unanimously and unambiguously supported my legislation to clarify that government officials – including the Governor’s office and members of the administration – should not create legally binding agreements to keep the public in the dark as it discusses legislation,” Patterson said in a statement to KCRA 3 on Thursday. “The legislative process is intended to be transparent and include members of the public, not exclude them. It’s great that my colleagues agree with this.”

In 2024, KCRA 3 reported that the governor’s office allowed nondisclosure agreements to keep secret the negotiations of a state law that raised the minimum wage for fast-food workers to $20 an hour. State lawmakers and other key voices later admitted they were entirely left out of the conversation.

Newsom’s allowed NDAs to cover the secret talks at the insistence of a major labor organization, SEIU California. Newsom’s office has said neither the governor nor his staff signed them. Since then, no one has been able to explain the bakery exemption, but multiple sources have told KCRA 3 it was for one of the governor’s billionaire donors, who is also a Panera franchisee.

Harsh Ghai, one of the largest operators of Burger King restaurants in the country, told KCRA 3 he was left in the dark about the law because of the use of NDAs. Joseph Bryant, an SEIU official who is also a member of California’s Fast-Food Council, which is meant to set the wages and working conditions for the workers across the state, would not confirm or deny that he signed the NDA.

KCRA 3 was also the first to report the government’s use of NDAs in the California Legislature’s construction of a new $1 billion and counting office building for state lawmakers and the governor. The Legislature directed 2,000 people, including five state lawmakers and dozens of people in the governor’s administration, to sign NDAs to keep broad information about the Capitol Annex project secret.

Newsom’s spokesperson has said the office does not sign NDAs for legislation, so Patterson’s bill would not impact the office.

California lawmakers and the governor last year approved a similar state law that now makes it a crime for lawmakers to sign or ask anyone to sign NDAs while using taxpayer dollars.

See more coverage of top California stories here | Download our app | Subscribe to our morning newsletter | Find us on YouTube here and subscribe to our channel