Senate committee holds informational briefing on SB 9 proposing limits on foreign land purchases near military bases and drone procurements

The Kansas Senate Judiciary Committee opened an informational briefing on Senate Bill 9, a proposal titled the Kansas Land and Military Installation Protection Act that would bar certain foreign principals from acquiring interests in land near military installations and limit government purchases of drones and critical drone components from specified countries.

The reviser told the committee the bill would generally prohibit a foreign principal from directly or indirectly acquiring any interest in real property located within 100 miles of the boundary of any military installation located in Kansas or an adjacent state, with limited de minimis exceptions. The measure would require a foreign principal who owns such property to register the interest with the attorney general within 90 days of the act’s effective date or acquisition, and it directs the secretary of state to notify business entities and nonprofits of the filing requirement. The reviser also described provisions extending enforcement tools — including court-ordered divestiture, injunctive relief, civil forfeiture and attorney fees — and amendments to the Kansas statutes governing asset forfeiture to treat violations as conduct giving rise to forfeiture.

Section 12, the reviser said, would bar state and local governmental agencies from purchasing drones, related services or critical components produced in a listed “country of concern” or owned by a foreign principal. Equipment purchased before July 1, 2025, could continue in use but replacement purchases would have to comply with the new rules unless the secretary of administration, after consulting the adjutant general, approved an acquisition that was necessary to avoid a greater safety or security risk. The bill would also require Kansas State University to prepare an annual report on foreign land holdings in Kansas and would require certain reporting to CFIUS and state legislative committees.

Supporters who testified described national-security rationales. Michael Lucci, founder of StateArmor, said "SB 9 speaks really directly to some of those clear threats," adding his group sees land purchases and drone sales as ways foreign adversaries could preposition assets and gather data. "We would expect China to be pre positioning assets across The United States to disrupt our military here and our critical infrastructure here, and they're doing exactly that," Lucci said.

Jackie Diehl, an advisory-board member with StateArmor testifying via WebEx, said the Chinese Communist Party has a sustained strategy "of going deep into The United States" to influence decision-making and gather intelligence and argued the state could use SB 9 to put barriers in place.

A retired Air Force general appearing for American Global Strategies said Chinese-linked entities have purchased U.S. farmland through complex shell-company structures and stressed the need for state-level tools alongside federal reviews.

Representatives of the agricultural and meat-processing sectors urged caution. Aaron Popelka, vice president of legal and governmental affairs for the Kansas Livestock Association, said the association was neutral and concerned primarily about maintaining existing meat-processing capacity, supply chains and markets. Popelka said his group favors narrow, targeted measures, limited exceptions (for inheritance, foreclosure, foreclosing on security interests), and consideration of CFIUS review outcomes.

Steven Cuba, government-relations manager for Smithfield Foods, said the company is opposed to the bill as written. He emphasized Smithfield is an American foods company with a 2013 CFIUS review that resulted in approval "with no mitigation measures," and asked for amendments to preserve Smithfield’s ability to invest and operate in Kansas.

Committee members did not take legislative action on SB 9 during the briefing. Chair Warren said SB 9 is not referred to the Judiciary Committee but is in conference committee; the session was held to inform committee members of the bill’s provisions and the issues raised by conferees. The reviser and conferees provided written materials for committee members and answered questions.

Why it matters: The bill intersects state-level land-use rules, procurement policy, and national-security concerns by proposing both civil-enforcement tools and procurement restrictions that could affect local government purchasing and private investments near military installations. Supporters framed the measure as a homeland-security safeguard; agricultural and business witnesses urged narrow exceptions and attention to CFIUS review history.

The committee closed the informational briefing on SB 9 without a vote; the measure remains in conference committee.