Sonoma County considers ban on ICE operations at county buildings and land

This post was originally published on this site.

Sonoma County is moving toward a formal policy that would bar federal immigration enforcement from staging or conducting operations on county-owned property.

At Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting, Supervisor Rebecca Hermosillo asked staff to return with options that would prevent U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement and other federal agencies from using land or buildings controlled by the county for activities like surveillance, arrests or similar operations. The board unanimously directed staff to bring back recommendations or an update at its meeting Dec. 9.

Hermosillo said the county could look to Santa Clara County, where supervisors in October approved a plan to inventory county lots, garages and other spaces federal authorities might use and add physical barriers, lock garages and erect signage to prohibit such activities. Other jurisdictions, including Berkeley and Alameda County, are pursuing similar rules as part of a spreading movement out of Chicago, one of the cities where federal immigration operations have intensified under President Donald Trump. Raids, mass arrests and reported aggressive tactics have sparked widespread community protests, pushback from officials and legal challenges. The Trump Administration has so far been unsuccessful in its attempt to deploy National Guard troops to the area. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently considering the case.

In Sonoma County, public comment Tuesday centered on whether a separate policy is necessary, with several speakers arguing the county could clarify or strengthen a resolution supervisors adopted in January rather than start a new process. They worried a fresh policy track could delay action they see as urgent — supervisors don’t convene again for over a month.

The January resolution affirmed the county’s support for immigrant communities, ordered staff training on responding to ICE and safeguarding personal information, and prohibited county departments and employees from using county resources, including property, “to investigate, interrogate, detain, detect, or arrest persons only for immigration enforcement purposes,” or to communicate with ICE about an individual’s status unless required by law.

Hermosillo said that resolution lacks specifics necessary to carry out a full and effective ban. She also referenced a first-of-its-kind meeting this week in the South Bay among the region’s county leaders and department heads on coordinated responses to immigration enforcement, saying those discussions could sharpen Sonoma County’s approach.

The proposal comes out of an ad hoc committee led by Hermosillo and Board Chair Lynda Hopkins, formed in response to calls for action amid deep fears in immigrant communities about ramped up enforcement under Trump’s mass deportation campaign, that has pushed legal boundaries.

It is unlikely to satisfy advocates who have been calling for a full sanctuary ordinance in Sonoma County. In recent months they have held hunger strikes, vigils and rallies. On Thursday, about 100 people protested outside the county’s Main Adult Detention Facility near an entrance advocates say ICE has used.

While local law enforcement agencies emphasize they do not participate in immigration enforcement, federal authorities can request certain inmate information and make arrests at the jail. State law limits what can be shared and how federal agents operate inside detention facilities, and Sheriff Eddie Engram has placed further restrictions on interactions with ICE at the Sonoma County jail. At an October meeting, an ICE official overseeing removals for the region urged Engram to loosen that policy; he declined. Still, Engram and the board have refused calls for endorsed a full non-cooperation policy.

During public comment Tuesday, Renee Saucedo of the Sanctuary Coalition of Sonoma County said she supports “an order to keep ICE off of county-controlled property,” but not with exceptions.

“No property should be carved out,” she said referring to the county jail. “Otherwise, we defeat the purpose of not contributing to the deportation machine.”

You can reach senior reporter Marisa Endicott at 707-521-5470 or marisa.endicott@pressdemocrat.com. On X (formerly Twitter) @marisaendicott and Facebook @InYourCornerTPD.