An Act Prohibiting The Ownership, Possession Or Acquisition Of Interests In Real Property Upon Or Abutting Military Installations Or Agricultural Lands By Certain Foreign Entities.
HB 6735 would prohibit certain foreign principals from directly or indirectly owning, possessing a controlling interest in, or acquiring real property that is on or adjacent to military installations or agricultural land in Connecticut. The bill defines foreign principals to include the governments, political parties, certain entities, and certain individuals tied to China or Russia, described in the bill as foreign countries of concern. It also requires buyers of property abutting military installations or agricultural land to sign an affidavit under penalty of perjury stating they are not a foreign principal and to file that affidavit with the Adjutant General shortly after closing.
The bill adds a separate notice-and-review process for prospective purchases by foreign principals within three miles of a military installation. Those buyers must notify the Adjutant General 30 days before the purchase, after which the Adjutant General must review the transaction for public safety and security and issue written findings and a recommendation to the buyer and Attorney General. If a prohibited purchase occurs, or if a court upholds a recommendation against the purchase, the Attorney General may bring a civil forfeiture action, seek seizure in limited circumstances, and have title vested in the state, subject to bona fide lienholders. The state may then sell the property and distribute proceeds according to the bill’s priority rules.
The bill would create new restrictions in Connecticut property law affecting land transactions near military installations and agricultural land, and it would establish new disclosure, notice, review, enforcement, and forfeiture procedures. It would give the Adjutant General and Attorney General new roles in screening and challenging certain real estate purchases, while also imposing affidavit obligations on buyers and creating potential consequences for transactions involving covered foreign principals. The measure would most directly affect foreign governments, foreign-controlled entities, and certain noncitizen individuals from China or Russia, as well as sellers, buyers, closing attorneys, and title professionals involved in qualifying real estate transactions.
The available voting history suggests the bill moved through committee with strong support, culminating in a unanimous 19-0 Joint Favorable Substitute vote. There are no committee transcript excerpts provided, so the record here shows procedural approval rather than detailed debate. Overall, the bill appears to have been treated as a security- and land-protection measure with broad committee backing.
The main points of contention inherent in the bill are its restrictions on foreign ownership of land near military sites and agricultural property, its focus on China and Russia as foreign countries of concern, and the breadth of the enforcement mechanism, including forfeiture and state seizure authority. Potential concerns would likely center on property rights, due process, the scope of the foreign principal definition, and the practical burden on real estate transactions and closing professionals. No recorded transcript debate is available here, so these issues are inferred from the bill’s structure rather than from stated objections in committee.