photo credit: Noah Abrams/KRCB
Sonoma County Board of Supervisors Chambers

On May 13, Sonoma County held its annual Truth Act forum, a required public report on the sheriff’s communications with federal immigration authorities.

The chambers were at capacity. The line for public comment stretched nearly two hours as residents addressed the sheriff and the Board of Supervisors about the county’s collaboration with Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Under California’s 2016 Truth Act, counties must hold a public meeting every year to disclose when and how local law enforcement interacted with ICE.

This year’s forum materials included the Sheriff’s 2025 ICE data. According to the report, ICE submitted 601 notification requests to the Sheriff’s Office last year, up nearly 25 percent from the previous year. Of those, the Sheriff returned 69 notifications, a slight increase from 64 in 2024, but a lower overall response rate compared to the year before.

Most speakers criticized the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office as the only county agency that still communicates with ICE, saying they don’t want tax dollars supporting that cooperation — and warning that public safety erodes when immigrant communities feel they can’t trust the Sheriff’s Office.

“Sheriff, by turning a blind eye on the action of ICE and ignoring the reality of what is happening under ICE’s watch and handing over individuals to them, you are participating in a fundamental breach of humanity,” said Elana Feldman.

“Like you’re concerned about letting somebody back out in the community that’s going to do harm. That’s not what this community is scared of. They’re scared of ICE,” said Bryan Huggins.

“We are tired because we come here and you don’t listen to us,” said a woman in Spanish who identified herself only as Gabriella.

A smaller group of speakers — and several supervisors — thanked the Sheriff for what they called a balanced approach, and for cooperating with ICE in cases involving people they described as dangerous.

Supervisor David Rabbitt held up the list of qualifying convictions tied to last year’s notifications.

“If you look at the list of these heinous crimes, and the amount of felonies, I’m not sure if the community is any safer with these folks out there amongst them,” Rabbitt said.

Supervisor Chris Coursey is the only county supervisor who has publicly shifted his stance on ICE collaboration.

“I’ve arrived at my opinion not because of the inmates involved here. I’ve arrived at my opinion because of what ICE has become: the armed, masked police force,” Coursey said.

He posed a direct question to Sheriff Eddie Engram:

COURSEY: “Does ICE need your help?”

ENGRAM: “I do not know if ICE needs my help or not.”

COURSEY: “You are providing it though.”

ENGRAM: “I don’t know what ICE has access to… What I do know is that it is my belief that providing information to ICE… protects public safety.”

Sheriff Engram says he is tightening policy again and that the Sheriff’s Office will restrict ICE responses to only felony convictions.

Community members repeated that they will continue pushing the Board of Supervisors and the Sheriff until Sonoma County ends all voluntary communication with ICE.