Senate approves law requiring registration of foreign interests near military installations and curbs drone component sourcing

The Kansas Senate adopted the conference committee report on House substitute for Senate Bill 9, the Kansas Land and Military Installation Protection Act. The measure requires foreign principals from listed "countries of concern" to register an interest in nonresidential real property located within 100 miles of the boundary of any military installation in Kansas and restricts replacement sourcing for government-owned drones that include components from those countries.

Sponsor remarks described the bill as a response to national-security concerns. "If you are a foreign principal from a country of concern and you want to directly or indirectly acquire any interest in real property located within that hundred miles of a military installation... you're going to have to register that you intend to acquire that with the secretary of state," a sponsor said. The listed countries of concern named on the floor are: the People's Republic of China, the Republic of Cuba, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea), the Russian Federation, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Taiwan was explicitly excluded from the definition.

Under the bill, foreign principals that already hold such property when the law takes effect must file a report; new acquisitions must be reported and may require review. The governor, with input from the attorney general and a fusion center oversight board, would review and approve requests to expand existing holdings that might pose security risks. Enforcement tools include investigation by the attorney general and possible divestment actions. The bill also addresses drones used by government agencies, allowing existing drones to remain in service but restricting replacement parts sourced from countries of concern.

Lawmakers questioned the scope of coverage and technical details. Senator Francisco asked which areas of Kansas would fall outside the 100-mile radius; the sponsor replied that the radius would cover most of the state "except for a small portion of the Southwest corner of the state of Kansas." Supporters described the bill as a necessary security step; the Senate later recorded a final vote of 38 in favor and 1 opposed and declared the measure passed.