Oklahoma House Bill HB1303

Oklahoma 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/4/25

Caption

Public finance; government entities; non-disclosure agreements; effective date.

Summary

HB1303 would prohibit state and local government entities in Oklahoma from entering into non-disclosure agreements as part of settlements when public money is used to pay the settlement. The restriction applies whether or not the underlying claim is already in civil litigation, and it covers settlements for money damages or other judicial relief. The bill creates a new section of law in Title 62 of the Oklahoma Statutes and is set to take effect on November 1, 2025. In practical terms, the bill is aimed at limiting the use of confidentiality provisions in publicly funded settlements. It would require government entities to resolve claims without agreeing to keep settlement terms or related information secret when taxpayer or other public revenue is involved. The measure is framed as a public finance and transparency bill, and it would affect state agencies, local governments, and any other covered public entity that settles claims using public funds.

Impact

The bill would add a new statutory prohibition in Title 62, Section 4601, barring state and local government entities from using non-disclosure agreements in settlements paid with public revenue. This would change how public entities negotiate and document settlement agreements, especially in cases involving claims for damages or injunctive relief. It would not appear to ban all confidentiality provisions generally, but it would remove the ability to use NDAs in the specific context of publicly funded settlements.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and available legislative history, the measure appears to have a transparency-oriented purpose and no recorded opposition or support in committee discussion or votes is available in the provided materials. The caption and language suggest a policy preference for openness in government spending and settlement practices. Because there are no transcripts or votes included, the overall sentiment can only be characterized as neutral to favorable from the bill’s introduction stage.

Contention

The main point of contention likely concerns the balance between public transparency and the flexibility of government attorneys and agencies to negotiate settlements. Supporters would likely favor disclosure and accountability when public funds are used, while critics may argue that banning NDAs could make it harder to settle claims efficiently or protect sensitive information in certain disputes. No specific contested amendments, committee objections, or recorded vote divisions are available in the provided materials.