|
As a general rule, we try to keep our newsletters locally focused and community oriented. There is plenty going wrong with the world that could provide fodder for many hundreds of newsletters. In the Fifth District, we’re working on solving local problems and sharing local news.
But there are times when what’s going wrong with the world quite literally hits home. Right now, too many local families are living in fear of ICE and find themselves under an omnipresent threat of deportation. Many of our friends and neighbors are afraid to leave their homes for fear that they may be separated from their families or whisked away by masked officers to an out-of-state detention facility… or worse, flown to a prison in a country they’ve never before set foot in. In response to this, you might have heard that the interfaith community — which includes churches and congregants from west county — is organizing a hunger strike until the Board of Supervisors passes an ordinance declaring ourselves a sanctuary county.
My heart is with anyone who is willing to forgo food to try to make the world a better place. I’m proud to live in a community that protests injustice and stands up for the most vulnerable among us. I admire the courage, compassion, and empathy of the folks participating in the hunger strike… especially since these virtues feel like they’re in particularly short supply nowadays.
Given this, you may be surprised or even angered by what I have to say next: I do not support passing a sanctuary ordinance. Here’s why.
1) We don’t actually have the power to become a sanctuary county.
Regardless of what we say or do, we cannot legally stop ICE from deporting members of our community. We can’t prevent federal U.S. law enforcement officers from coming into our communities, public parks and public areas of buildings and detaining or arresting residents.
Could we use the word “sanctuary”? Sure. But could we actually turn Sonoma County into a sanctuary, and shut ICE out? Sadly, no. ICE is empowered by law to conduct immigration enforcement. The federal government just invested $29.9 billion into ICE enforcement and deportation efforts, tripling the agency’s budget.
Knowing that we can’t stop mass immigration sweeps — and that more will come with the increased funding — is a horrible feeling. It’s something I think about every day, and it’s difficult to imagine the weight this reality places on our immigrant community members.
2) Because of #1, adopting a sanctuary ordinance could cause harm.
It risks creating a false sense of security and contributes to misinformation. Worse, it may put a target on the backs of local immigrants and refugees—particularly under a federal administration that has demonstrated a willingness to pursue retribution.
Earlier this year, the administration released a list of so-called “sanctuary jurisdictions,” which included the entire State of California and Sonoma County. That list was later withdrawn after pushback from several conservative counties that were also named.
However, just today, the Justice Department reissued and expanded the list—this time under Executive Order 14287, formalizing the designation process as part of a broader federal enforcement strategy. Sonoma County is not currently listed, but California remains, and the administration has explicitly stated its intent to pursue litigation and ICE enforcement against named jurisdictions.
This moment calls for clarity, compassion, and a steady focus on the well-being of our entire community.
3) The current sanctuary ordinance request seems to be focused on the interactions of the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office with ICE.
But there’s a problem with the Board of Supervisors (BOS) adopting a sanctuary ordinance: the BOS doesn’t have authority over the law enforcement policies of the Sonoma County Sheriff's Office (SCSO). Which means that even if we passed an ordinance telling the Sheriff what to do, he wouldn’t have to do it. Why? Because SCSO authority is derived from the Constitution of the State of California. The Sheriff does not report to the BOS. In my mind, it doesn’t make sense to adopt a policy that we don’t actually have the authority to implement. Again, this could create a false sense of security and contribute to misinformation.
4) I support the current SCSO policy, which is actually more protective of immigrants than the policy of the State of California.
a) What is the SCSO’s policy under (and beyond) the State law of S.B. 54?
First of all, the Sheriff’s office does not coordinate with ICE or participate in immigration enforcement, sweeps or raids. SCSO does not honor ICE holds or detainers, either. In fact, SCSO does not detain anyone for ICE unless legally required to — which means there is a signed warrant from a judge ordering them to.
b) So then what does the Sheriff’s office do, and how does it interact with ICE?
Currently, the Sheriff’s office gives less information to ICE than it would give to any member of the public. If a member of the public calls SCSO to inquire about the release date of an incarcerated person, SCSO will provide the date and time of release. If ICE inquires about the release date of an incarcerated person, SCSO only provides that information if the incarcerated person has been convicted of serious and violent felonies. (There is a matrix determining precisely what and how many crimes qualify. SCSO has modified this matrix over the years in ways that reduce the number of notifications.)
c) Of the 484 requests from ICE to SCSO last year, only 64 received a response with information about release date and time. (This represents a decrease in notifications of 11% from 2023.)
These 64 responses resulted in 10 ICE arrests on the grounds of the Main Adult Detention Facility. The 64 notifications included the following categories and numbers: 34 violent crimes (weapons, robbery, drug sales, kidnapping, arson), 3 sex offenses, 12 felony DUIs, 15 miscellaneous (identity theft, burglary, federal warrant, evading).
In prior years I have reviewed details of the notification list cases. Every case I reviewed included violent and serious felonies. These were not one-offs, not minor crimes, not a couple of youthful bad decisions — these were serious repeat offenders. Are we fighting to protect the vast majority of our immigrant community, or are we fighting to protect the ten folks arrested by ICE who repeatedly committed crimes? The Sheriff is trying his best to strike a balance in protecting both our immigrant community and the safety of the public at large.
5) Finally, the Board of Supervisors did adopt a resolution earlier this year in support of our immigrant community.
We directed all the County departments we oversee to take substantive action in support of immigrants. As a result, we have changed some of our policies and practices to help ensure continued immigrant access to our services. That resolution is available HERE.
We could declare ourselves a fire-free county. We could declare ourselves a flood-free county. But that won’t stop the fires or floods from coming. What makes more sense to me is to prepare ourselves for fires and floods — or in this case, prepare ourselves for ICE raids by volunteering for or donating to local non-profits. I challenge you to take a know-your-rights training, to learn how to support immigrants and refugees as a legal observer, or to contribute to an immigrant-supporting non-profit.
I deeply respect our community’s conviction and willingness to take a stand. I am committed to working for, fighting for, and standing alongside our immigrant community. But I can’t vote for something I don’t believe in. I can’t vote for an ordinance that amounts to an empty promise. I can’t do something that looks good on paper but doesn’t result in action and, worse, may cause harm. I’m not afraid to speak truth to power or to stand up for my beliefs… but to me, this one feels like pretending I have power. It feels like grandstanding to make a point in a way that could hurt folks who are living with an impossible daily reality. I understand that many community members feel and see things differently than I do. It’s possible for good people to hold the same values and goals and yet still disagree on strategy. I look forward to continuing the conversation with all of you… My door and mind are always open!
Take care,
| 
