Committee adopts substitute to SB 88 after proponents warn of foreign farmland purchases

The Senate General Government Committee adopted a substitute amendment for Senate Bill 88 — the Ohio Property Protection Act — after proponent witnesses testified that foreign-linked purchases of U.S. farmland pose a growing risk to Ohio agriculture.

The committee, chaired by Chair Rother, moved to adopt “substitute, Bill 04842-2” and approved the substitute “without objection,” the chair announced. The session also approved routine minutes earlier in the meeting by unanimous consent.

Proponent witnesses said the substitute expands disclosure and would bar purchases of certain "protected property" by entities linked to countries the secretary of state deems threats to agricultural production, critical infrastructure, security or military defense. Evan Coates of the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation told the committee, “Land owned by foreign adversaries is only the latest threat to protecting farmland not just in Ohio but across the country,” and cited USDA data showing Ohio lost nearly 300,000 acres of farmland in the last five years.

Harrison Siders of State Armor Action urged state-level steps to reduce what he described as exposure to foreign influence, arguing states must act in concert with federal efforts. “We must take action at a state level to protect our land and people from the nefarious actions of the Chinese communist party,” Siders said in his testimony.

The substitute circulated to members adds a disclosure and a prohibition tied to a secretary-of-state determination; it also states that a brokerage has no duty to determine whether a purchaser or seller is subject to the prohibition. Committee discussion on the language was brief and the chair stated the substitute was adopted “without objection.”

Witnesses requested additional tools beyond the bill language: the Ohio Farm Bureau said better real-time reporting of foreign ownership would be essential, referencing the AFIDA Improvements Act of 2024 at the federal level as an example of strengthened reporting and enforcement. Committee members asked witnesses for additional data; Evan Coates said he did not have a breakdown of the acreage sold to foreign nationals but offered to provide the figures to the chair.

The substitute adoption completes the committee’s immediate procedural action on the bill; the transcript records no subsequent roll-call vote on the underlying substantive provisions during the hearing. Several witnesses indicated follow-up requests and data needs, suggesting additional committee work or floor amendments could follow.

The hearing record contains proponent testimony only; no opponent witnesses appeared. The committee chair closed the SB 88 portion of the agenda and moved to the next item.

At the close of the committee’s public session, the chair announced adjournment and listed subsequent hearings on the agenda.