Hundreds of residents press sheriff and board over ICE notifications after quarterly jail report

Sheriff Livingston presented the Alameda‑area county’s quarterly oversight report for April–June 2025 to the Board of Supervisors on Aug. 12, reviewing custodial and field operations figures and the county’s evolving protocols for immigration notifications. The presentation prompted extensive public comment focused on immigration enforcement and county cooperation with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Highlights the sheriff presented included about 4,000 bookings for the period and roughly 565 custody‑alternative bookings, daily average population figures by facility, and a breakdown of bookings by race and jurisdiction. The report showed a decrease in in‑custody deaths for the period and noted continued deployment of Narcan by custody medical staff. The sheriff also described a rise in calls for service in the spring and summer months and discussed ongoing outreach and prevention programs, such as the custody alternative program (CAF), which the sheriff said saves costs by supervising people outside physical detention.

Sheriff Livingston told supervisors the department had tightened reviews of ICE requests after past concerns. “We have no known cases” of improper notifications in the last year, he said, adding that all notifications now require supervisory approval. He emphasized that state law and department policy bar broad cooperation with ICE and that only notifications matching state law criteria are made.

Public comment, however, focused heavily on immigration enforcement. Dozens of speakers — in chambers and online — urged the board to adopt a “no cooperation” or “no‑loophole” county ordinance prohibiting voluntary notifications or other assistance to ICE. Speakers included community organizers, clergy, health care workers and people who described direct family impacts; several said fear of ICE has already deterred people from seeking medical care, Head Start and other county services.

Supervisor John Gioia and others pressed for more data to understand disparities in the criminal justice system, asking whether bookings could be correlated with charging and conviction records. Several supervisors and county staff noted limits on data access because charging and conviction records are controlled by the courts and district attorney’s office; the county’s racial justice oversight body said it would weigh in on data access strategies.

After the public comment and discussion, the board accepted the sheriff’s quarterly report. Supervisors also agreed to direct the Equity Committee to develop clearer county policies on immigration‑related interactions, including guidance for county departments (health, Head Start, human services, libraries, etc.) on how to respond if ICE appears at county facilities. The board approved a motion to accept the report and to refer policy work to the Equity Committee; that motion carried unanimously.

Sheriff Livingston said his office will continue to meet with the public defender and others about notification protocols and encouraged continued dialogue on how state law (including provisions commonly referenced as SB 54) shapes local practice. Residents at the meeting urged the board to quickly develop bright‑line rules to reassure the community and county employees. The board asked county counsel and staff to return with more concrete policy options and possible next steps for committee review.

(Ending) The sheriff’s quarterly data and the large public turnout signaled strong community interest in immigration‑enforcement policy and racial disparities; the board’s referral to the Equity Committee begins a process to draft clearer departmental guidance and potential ordinances.