The county and sheriff have separate authority
On April 7, 2026, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors unanimously advanced an ordinance that would bar county employees from assisting federal immigration enforcement, restrict the use of county property for such operations and protect immigration-related information unless disclosure is legally required. The board also approved $1.5 million for immigrant-support services, according to the county’s announcement.
The county’s ordinance FAQ says the measure does not govern agencies under other elected officials, including the sheriff. It cites the sheriff’s independent constitutional and statutory functions as the reason the Board of Supervisors cannot direct the Sheriff’s Office. The result is two county institutions taking different approaches to cooperation with federal immigration authorities.
The dispute concerns limited communication with ICE
The policy described in the KTVU report permits the Sheriff’s Office to notify ICE before releasing people convicted of serious or violent felonies or when federal agents present a judicial warrant. The office does not honor civil ICE detainers without a court warrant, the report said. The county FAQ separately says the Sheriff’s Office does not proactively contact ICE, does not participate in immigration enforcement or honor ICE holds, and allows ICE into the jail only to make an arrest.
KTVU also described Sonoma as one of six of nine Bay Area counties with a limited-cooperation approach. Alameda, San Mateo and Santa Clara counties were identified as jurisdictions that do not respond to ICE detainer or notification requests. Protesters are seeking that stricter model in Sonoma County, arguing that any notification can facilitate deportation.
The policy became the focus of a winery gathering
Dozens of protesters gathered outside a Sonoma County winery on Thursday during the Kick-off Social for the newly formed Sonoma County Sheriff’s Foundation, according to KTVU. They called on Sheriff Eddie Engram to end all cooperation with ICE. The demonstration turned the foundation’s launch event into a public dispute over the limits of local participation in federal immigration enforcement.
Jail figures remain part of the debate
The Sheriff’s Office responded to 64 of 484 ICE release-notification requests in 2024, according to data reported by The Press Democrat. California’s TRUTH Act requires local governments that maintain communications with ICE to hold annual public forums about the practice. The figures and the continuing policy dispute have given advocates another basis for pressing the sheriff to end notification altogether.
Recent figures and legal safeguards
According to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors, ICE made 601 release-notification requests in 2025, and the Sheriff’s Office responded to 69. One person was transferred to ICE custody under a federal warrant. The Sheriff’s Office says it annually reports all ICE interactions to the public and the Board of Supervisors at a TRUTH Act Community Forum, according to its immigration information page. California’s Attorney General’s Office says the TRUTH Act also requires local agencies to provide written consent information before an ICE interview, explain that the interview is voluntary and allow the person to decline it or request an attorney.
