North DakotaAgencies would face limits on secrecy agreements for major projects
The failed proposal would limit state and local agencies' secrecy agreements with developers of data centers and industrial projects, subject to existing public-record exceptions.
What it does
Agencies would not be allowed to use secrecy agreements to limit public information about data centers or industrial projects. Violating agreements could block project approvals.
The proposal would preserve existing public-record access rules. Agencies could still protect information that state law already keeps confidential, but could not silence discussion of open records.
Applicants would have to declare under penalty of perjury that they followed the secrecy-agreement rules. Agencies could face penalties of up to $1,000 per violation.
Argument forMore project information could become available to communities because agencies could not agree to keep open-record information secret or require developer approval before speaking.
Argument againstAgencies and developers could face delayed or lost approvals when a prohibited agreement exists, even if the project otherwise meets approval requirements.
More detail
State and local agencies would be barred from entering certain secrecy agreements with developers. The restriction would cover operating, proposed, approved, and construction-stage data centers and industrial projects. The agreements covered would restrict public discussion or disclosure of project information, label project information confidential, or require a developer's advance approval before disclosure. If a developer entered a prohibited agreement, the agency could not approve or issue project permits, licenses, certifications, zoning approvals, tax incentives, or other authorizations. A prohibited agreement would be void and unenforceable. The proposed restrictions would apply from filing with the secretary of state through June 30, 2027.
Agencies could continue protecting records that state law already makes confidential or exempt from disclosure. The bill would preserve the public's existing right to access agency records and would allow confidentiality agreements for information already protected by state law. The bill would not create or expand a public-records exemption. Agencies could discuss the substance of an open record, and an agreement blocking that discussion would be void. These proposed rules would apply from filing with the secretary of state through June 30, 2027.
Developers would have to swear that they had not entered a prohibited secrecy agreement, while violating agencies could face penalties. The declaration would apply to developers submitting applications, and an agency violation could lead to a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation. A false declaration would be made under penalty of perjury. A developer's violation could support suspension, revocation, or rescission of an agency permit or approval. The attorney general or the county state's attorney could sue to recover the civil penalty from an agency. The proposed application and enforcement rules would apply from filing with the secretary of state through June 30, 2027.
Where do you stand?
Choose your position
Tell your reps
Take a position to see your representatives and ways to contact them.
Where it stands
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Looking ahead
No hearings or votes scheduled.
History
- 2026
- Sep 3Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 15 nays 32Latest
- Vote recorded Motion for Final Passage on SB 2406. Result: fail.Upper
- Sep 3Amendment adopted, placed on calendar
- Sep 2Reported back amended, do not pass, placed on calendar 6 2 0Minor
- Sep 2Committee Hearing 10:30
- Sep 2Introduced, first reading, referred Joint Policy CommitteeIntroduced
- Sep 3Second reading, failed to pass, yeas 15 nays 32Latest
Government & EthicsConsumer ProtectionEnvironment & Energy