Concerns about transparency and potential violations of Texas state records law have deepened following the Marfa Police Department’s deletion of a social media post introducing School Resource Officer (SRO) King Merritt. On October 16, 2024, Big Bend Times publisher David Flash filed a formal complaint with Marfa Police Chief Gilbert Carrillo after Lieutenant Nichole Fuentes admitted to deleting the post. The complaint raises significant legal questions about the department’s adherence to records retention requirements under Texas law.
The original post, which introduced Officer Merritt and highlighted his law enforcement experience and new role in the Marfa Independent School District (MISD), was deleted after Flash raised concerns about Merritt’s background in a live video. Flash pointed out inconsistencies in Merritt’s educational credentials listed on his campaign website, alongside allegations of threatening behavior by Merritt toward both Flash and the Jeff Davis County clerk.
Complaint Details and Records Law Violations
In his formal complaint to Chief Carrillo, Flash emphasized that Lieutenant Fuentes admitted to deleting the post without archiving it or following proper retention protocols. According to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission (TSLAC), government social media posts, such as those introducing public officials or documenting public relations matters, must be retained for a minimum of two years under Texas Government Code §552.351 and §552.352. Deleting such posts without proper archival processes could constitute a violation of these statutes.
Flash also highlighted Lieutenant Fuentes’ procedural missteps during their conversation. During their conversation, Lieutenant Fuentes admitted to Flash that the post had been deleted. When Flash provided context about the situation, Fuentes unexpectedly asked whether Flash had a formal complaint about Merritt and suggested that any complaint should be made through an open records request. She further stated that their attorney would handle it if Flash chose to proceed. However, at no point had Flash expressed an intention to file a complaint—he was simply recounting the circumstances surrounding the deleted post.
Fuentes’ recommendation to file a complaint through open records was a non sequitur, unrelated to Flash’s inquiry, and demonstrated a misunderstanding of the department’s obligations under public records law. Her comments only added to the concerns about whether the Marfa Police Department is properly managing its records and following appropriate legal processes.
No Replacement Post, Further Questions Raised
Fuentes had initially explained that the post was deleted to be replaced with one showing Merritt interacting with students, yet no such replacement post has appeared on the department’s social media platforms. This has led to further speculation about whether the Marfa Police Department is fully transparent in its handling of public information related to Officer Merritt’s appointment as SRO.
Flash’s complaint, which was sent to Chief Carrillo, calls for an investigation into the deletion of the post and the potential breach of Texas state records law. Under Texas Government Code §614.023, the department is required to investigate formal complaints against law enforcement officers and notify the complainant of the outcome.
Implications for Public Records and Transparency
The situation underscores the importance of compliance with Texas state laws regarding the retention of government records, including social media posts. Public relations records, such as the introduction of a new SRO, hold significant public interest, particularly in the context of school safety and law enforcement appointments. The deletion of such posts without proper retention protocols can result in the permanent loss of public information, undermining transparency and accountability within local government.
The Marfa Police Department’s failure to replace the post, combined with Fuentes’ admission of its deletion and her procedural misstatements, has brought the department’s internal processes into question. As scrutiny continues to build, the department’s next steps in addressing the complaint and ensuring compliance with state law will be closely watched by the community.
