The charged teacher and student denied allegations in an internal handling of the matter
MARFA — Court records in the case alleging Marfa ISD teacher Rebecca Ontiveros had an improper relationship with a male high school student show that the district first heard word of the allegations in April this year, well before the School Board granted her a new contract on August 18 to teach pre-K. However, “all parties” denied the allegations at the time, according to a probable cause affidavit in a search warrant filed in district court last Friday. The Big Bend Sentinel has found new details on exactly what the district did in April to investigate the tip.
The School Board met last Thursday on personnel matters — including whether Board President Teresa Nuñez, Ontiveros’ mother, should resign. The closed session resulted in screaming matches emanating from the closed door, including obscenities.
While members of the public attending the meeting said they thought that the employment of Ontiveros also would be discussed –– she had been on paid administrative leave since her August 21 arrest –– Interim Superintendent Arturo Alferez told The Big Bend Sentinel that she was no longer with the district as of 5 p.m. last Wednesday. Ontiveros had been charged with an improper relationship with a student, was jailed, then released the following day on a $75,000 bond. At the time of Alferez’s brief statement, it was unclear whether she was terminated or resigned; Alferez had no further comment. The board took no action after the closed session.
The court records revealed Friday — search warrants sought by the Texas Ranger investigating the case — offer a more detailed scope of the alleged relationship between Ontiveros and a male high school student. The Ranger, Malcolm White, accompanied by other law enforcement officers, went to Marfa ISD on August 21 to interview Ontiveros and the unnamed student — SVI, a label for student victim one. The grandmother of the student had made a formal complaint to the Marfa Police Department, which then contacted the Rangers. The grandmother told police that Ontiveros and the student told her on separate occasions that they were involved in an “ongoing sexual relationship.”
The student and Ontiveros initially denied a relationship when confronted by police, but Ontiveros eventually “confessed” to having sex with the student on two occasions in June and July of 2025 — both in her car — according to affidavits. “Ontiveros later confessed that she and SVI frequently communicated over Snapchat and that SVI had made numerous sexual advances towards her while they communicated over Snapchat as well as in person,” the affidavit stated. “Ontiveros stated that she and SVI began communicating over Snapchat in the fall of 2024,” it said.
The records showed authorities also interviewed a juvenile witness one, (JWI) who said the student and Ontiveros “had been hanging out at Ontiveros’ residence in Marfa.” The affidavit did not give a time period for this account. On these occasions, JWl reported that “SVl and Ontiveros would often go alone into Ontiveros’ room for long periods of time. JWl had also witnessed SVl and Ontiveros flirting with one another while in public.”
Ontiveros told Ranger White that she blocked the student on Snapchat on August 16 after “interpersonal issues.” The warrants seek searches of Snapchat accounts, Ontiveros’ iPhone, and her car, which was sealed and impounded. All of the warrants were issued by 394th District Judge Monty Kimball on August 25, except for the car, which was issued on September 2. Not filed yet with the district clerk is an arrest warrant probable cause affidavit. However, The Sentinel obtained it from a third party who received it in an open records request to the Department of Public Safety.
Affidavits and warrant information “executed” — meaning signed — by a judge are supposed to be filed immediately with the judge’s clerk for public inspection unless the subject of a warrant hasn’t been arrested or released on bond yet. The Presidio district clerk had not received these records — as they were supposed to — until Friday morning, several days after they were executed. Without the Texas Rangers commenting on who issued their warrants, it became a guessing game for The Sentinel for more than a week for which of the 11 or so tri-county judges issued them. Contact with all of them resulted in several reporting they had no records.
On Thursday night, Judge Kimballl — who initially did not respond to an email on Tuesday — said in a brief phone call that he had executed the warrants. Thus, he is responsible under Texas law for having them filed with the Presidio County district clerk to be made public — something he never did, at least for several days. When asked why the documents weren’t filed sooner with the clerk, he replied, “I don’t know.”
Earlier this week, The Sentinel got further clarification — from sources close to board members who wished to rename unnamed for privacy reasons — on what the district did when it received the April complaint. The complaint came through the district’s online system for filing anonymous complaints and mentioned the improper relationship, but only listed the initials for the teacher and student. Those initials matched those of the Ontiveros and the student.
The district alerted the Marfa Police Department, which brought in the teacher and student and others who may have been witnesses to the crime. All denied the allegations. Without any immediate power to confiscate mobile phones or use any further investigative techniques without concrete evidence of the improper relationship, the complaint was dismissed.
Authorities and board members felt at the time that an anonymous complaint could have been filed to harass or put in question the teacher and student. Improper relationships between educators are normally reported to the Texas Education Agency (TEA) However, Texas law notes that the notice is not required if there is no evidence of the crime. It’s unknown whether the district has since notified the TEA after Ontiveros’ arrest. Also in question is whether the district is required to notify federal agencies, since Title IX law requires it for the charges.
The board is expected to meet again on September 15 with another closed session to discuss board roles and responsibilities. Under Texas law, there is no mechanism — other than court action — for board members to remove Nuñez from the board, although members could decide to restructure and remove her as president. Those actions would be voted on in public session See “School Board may have violated nepotism law in hiring of board president’s daughter” on page 1 for more on the Monday meeting.
Sources all questioned why the board didn’t come back into public session after the scream fest last Thursday to note that Ontiveros had resigned the day prior, since a key community concern was that she was on paid administrative leave for about a week.
The Sentinel could not reach Ontiveros for comment. Alferez did not respond to requests for comment after responding last week to note that Ontiveros had left the district. Nuñez and other board members declined to comment for this story. Board Member Jay Foster could not be reached for comment. Under board policy, board members are supposed to have all communications with the media go through the board president or interim superintendent.