Activists Declare Hunger Strike, Demanding Sanctuary Status for Sonoma County

A group of faith leaders and activists set up camp outside of Sonoma County’s office in Santa Rosa on Tuesday, vowing not to eat or leave until the jurisdiction declares itself a sanctuary for undocumented immigrants.

About a dozen people, coordinated by the Sonoma County Sanctuary Coalition, a group of local faith-based and immigrants’ rights organizers, plan to hunger strike outside of the county’s Board of Supervisors’ chamber until the county agrees to pass a resolution protecting immigrants from federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“With the large immigrant community that [Sonoma County] has — immigrant workers who sustain the wine industry and the hospitality and tourism industries — it really is a slap in the face that the Board of Supervisors has not yet passed this law,” said Renee Saucedo, a community organizer with environmental group Raizes Collective and one of the strikers.

“We’re going to camp all day, every day, and we’re not going to give up until Sonoma County minimally passes a sanctuary ordinance so that people can feel safe that local law enforcement will not report them to ICE,” she continued.

Saucedo said that activists have urged the county to pass a sanctuary policy for years, but that the need has become increasingly pressing in recent months as ICE enforcement has escalated throughout California and after the agency received a federal budget boost.

She said the Sanctuary Coalition, which formed after President Trump’s election in November, is worried that Sonoma could begin to see more widespread raids like those occurring at farms, hardware stores and gas stations in Southern California, and more recently, Sacramento.

Sonoma County is one of four Bay Area counties that does not have a local ordinance declaring itself a sanctuary for undocumented people, but in January, supervisors did pass a resolution pledging to protect immigrants’ civil rights.

Sonoma County Supervisor Lynda Hopkins said the resolution — which is less forceful than an ordinance — directed county departments to safeguard immigrants’ sensitive information and ensure they can continue to access services. The resolution also calls for the county to comply with a trio of California sanctuary laws that limit how local law enforcement agencies interact with ICE.

Hopkins, who chairs the board, said she and Vice Chair Rebecca Hermosillo met with the Sanctuary Coalition earlier this summer, and have another discussion set for later this month. Hopkins said she respects their pledge to strike, and believes the activists and county largely have the same priorities for protecting immigrants.

In her opinion, however, a sanctuary ordinance would do little to expand actual protections for undocumented people, while peddling false hope.

“We, at this point, can’t actually create a sanctuary county,” Hopkins said. “Even if we called ourselves a sanctuary county, ICE is still able to come in here and, honestly, take folks anytime, anywhere. That’s a really alarming reality that we’re facing.”

She also reiterated a fear expressed by Napa police officials in January when discussing why they had not passed local sanctuary laws: that doing so could draw scrutiny from the federal government.

“It might actually put a target on the backs of our immigrant community and lead to increased ICE action and ICE presence in our community,” Hopkins said.

Along with Napa and Sonoma, Contra Costa and Marin counties also lack express sanctuary laws. Contra Costa County has said it follows state law and supports immigrants in the East Bay county.

In Marin County, a tense, hourslong debate at a Board of Supervisors meeting in 2020 ended without a sanctuary ordinance. The supervisors at the time passed a resolution calling on the Sheriff’s Office to greatly reduce its correspondence with ICE, but stopped short of declaring a sanctuary county, citing disagreements with the sheriff over what he should report.

Unlike cities, whose councils directly oversee their police chiefs, county officials do not have authority over sheriff’s offices beyond approving their budgets.

Then-Marin County Sheriff Robert Doyle defended sharing information — like when some incarcerated people will be released — with ICE, according to reporting from the Marin Independent Journal at the time. Supervisors passed a resolution urging Doyle to limit publicly posting release dates, limit reporting released to ICE to only undocumented people with serious or violent felony convictions, and notify ICE if someone facing pending charges for a serious crime is undocumented, only if a judge determines there is probable cause at a preliminary hearing.

While Saucedo said she believes Sonoma’s sheriff is complying with ICE, Hopkins believes California law already prevents the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office from sharing personal information, like immigration status, with ICE unless it is subpoenaed.

She said the Sheriff’s Office doesn’t ask people their immigration status, and if ICE were to subpoena their data collection system, the records would not include that information.

“He’s actually going above and beyond [California law] in terms of noncooperation with ICE or non-notification based on ICE requests,” Hopkins told KQED.

Sheriff’s Office spokesperson Juan Valencia told KQED that the department doesn’t proactively contact ICE, and only responds to its information requests when it seeks public intel or is legally required to.

The department will only hold a person being released for immigration officials if they receive a warrant.

“We don’t actually do any enforcement at all of immigration, that’s not our job,” Valencia said.

Even with the state law, Saucedo said several other Bay Area counties, including San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara and Alameda, have passed local ordinances expanding sanctuary protections.

She also pointed out that Humboldt County in Northern California — “which,” she said, “is not considered to be the bastion of radical politics” — has one of the state’s strongest laws against ICE.

“It really is unforgivable,” she told KQED, that Sonoma has not followed suit.

She and a group of 10 to 15 strikers began their action on Tuesday at 9 a.m., pitching tents and holding a ceremonial opening with dozens more activists and faith leaders. Throughout the week, Saucedo said people plan to join the core group of strikers for a day of fasting or support, but only a small group will remain camped outside the county office.

“We’re holding this hunger strike to convey the message to the Board of Supervisors and to the community at large that we won’t stop until our law passes, and immigrant communities are safer,” Saucedo said.

KQED’s Carly Severn contributed to this report.