Senate panel adopts substitute language for property bill aimed at blocking foreign adversaries from buying Ohio farmland

The Senate General Government Committee adopted a substitute amendment to Senate Bill 88 on a voice vote and then heard proponent testimony urging action to limit foreign adversaries’ purchases of Ohio farmland.

The substitute, adopted without objection, would add a disclosure that “individuals, businesses, counties, criminal enterprises, gangs, cartels, organizations, and governments associated with countries that are deemed by the secretary of state to constitute a threat to the agricultural production, critical infrastructure, security, or military defense of the state or the United States are prohibited from acquiring protected property as defined in section 5301.256 of the Ohio Revised Code” and specify that a brokerage has no duty to investigate whether a purchaser or seller is subject to that prohibition.

Why it matters: Committee members said the change puts the committee on record while proponents said stronger state rules and better federal reporting are needed to understand and address the pace of farmland loss.

Evan Callie Coates, representing the Ohio Farm Bureau Federation, told the committee that farm advocates are concerned about foreign ownership. “In the most recent Ag Census published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Ohio has lost nearly 300,000 acres of farmland in the last five years,” Callie Coates said, adding that “without real time data it is impossible to understand the true threat to Ohio and American agriculture proposed by foreign adversaries.” He urged the General Assembly to consider rural planning measures alongside property restrictions.

Harrison Siders of State Armor Action also testified in favor of the bill, focusing on national security risks. “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. He cited public reporting of agricultural land purchases and said some purchases have been “suspiciously close to sensitive U.S. military installations” and have used shell LLCs.

Committee procedure and next steps: The substitute was moved for adoption by the chair and was adopted “without objection,” after which the panel received proponent testimony during the bill’s second hearing. Committee members asked proponents for data and clarification; for example, Senator DeMora asked whether the Farm Bureau had a breakdown of how many of the recent acres went to foreign nationals. Callie Coates said the organization did not have exact figures on that breakdown but offered to try to obtain them.

What supporters requested: Witnesses asked the legislature to pair statutory limits with better data collection and enforcement. Callie Coates pointed to federal proposals such as the AFIDA Improvements Act of 2024 as an example of steps to strengthen reporting of foreign ownership of agricultural land.

The committee did not take a final vote on SB 88 itself; the record shows only the adoption of the substitute language and the completion of the second hearing with proponent testimony and questions.