The state’s Public Education Hotline picked up some of the first signs of trouble.
It lit up on Feb. 7, as worried callers began reporting their fears that a Facebook post by state school board member Natalie Cline was harassing and endangering a student.
By the end of the day, a newly released report shows, the board’s Internal Audit Department had logged 180 concerns raised in calls, in email and via submissions to an online complaint form — and they would keep coming in following days.
The analysis gives a behind-the-scenes look at how the Utah State Board of Education came to take rare disciplinary action against Cline, censuring her and limiting her board responsibilities after she incorrectly implied the minor was transgender.
The Salt Lake Tribune obtained the report through an open records request. The board noted it could have chosen to keep the analysis confidential, under the state Government Records Access and Management Act, but chose to release it.
Cline’s post goes up
Cline’s original Facebook message focused on a high school girls’ basketball team in Salt Lake County and was posted late on Feb. 6. It included what appeared to be screenshots of a flyer about upcoming games and a school banner with images of team members.
“No images were redacted,” the internal report noted, and the post included the names of schools. One student appeared in both images and Cline captioned the photos with “Girls’ basketball…”
On the attack
Commenters on the post overnight and into the next morning interpreted Cline’s post as implying or making the point that the student was transgender. The online conversation became explicit, with commenters asserting their incorrect belief that student was male, writing about her using male pronouns, and criticizing the student’s appearance and skills.
One urged readers: “Parents please get involved and speak up for our girls,” insisting the student “does NOT belong playing against girls.”
Complaints pour in
On Feb. 7, calls, emails and other messages poured in to the state board, the report said. “Due to the volume,” it said, not all of them could be included.
But generally, it summarized, people “allege that Member Cline’s social media post was inappropriate, uncivil, and harassment. Many complainants also raised concerns about the safety of the students identified, particularly the one student that appears in both images.”
The report includes a sampling of complaints and excerpts, including these:
• “Natalie Cline’s post potentially puts [the student’s] safety at risk. The comments on this thread were awful. People spoke about coming to the game and protesting against this young woman. Natalie Cline, as a school board member should not be putting the safety of minors at risk.”
• Cline “posted a picture of the student and allows her Facebook page to be a Petri dish for hate speech and threats. Anyone who comments calling her out for doing the child is deleted and or blocked. I am extremely concerned for the safety of this child. Please stop the names and investigate this more.”
• “People are making horrific comments and encouraging harassment of the principal, the coaches, and the student.”
A mother’s fear
The student’s mother was among those complained. Although the report does not note the date or time of her email to the board, she describes Cline’s initial Feb. 6 post.
“Quickly people started commenting saying hateful things about my daughter and making assumptions that she is a male posing as a female,” the student’s mother wrote. “This is hateful, hurtful and needs to stop. There was no fact checking done just assumptions based on a photo. My heart aches for my daughter.”
An investigation’s first steps
The Internal Audit Department went to Cline’s Facebook page to verify the post, the report said, and at that time, it also documented 53 comments, 12 shares and 94 reactions.
The student’s mother had noted that she was “not sure where [Cline] got the photos,” and IA staff tried to check the basketball team’s Instagram page to see if it was the original source. However, the page had been marked as private by them, the report said.
Cline’s post comes down
When IA checked Cline’s Facebook page later in the day on Feb. 7, the original post had been removed. In a new post, Cline didn’t refer to her own note, instead saying she had shared “a public advertisement for a school basketball game and it created a firestorm around one of the players pictured.”
She said she had removed the original post to protect the player and apologized for “the negative attention my post drew to innocent students and their families.”
The day ended without public action by IA or state board members.
New day, newer post, continued complaints
The calls and concerns kept coming on Feb. 8, exceeding another 170 by the end of the day.
IA went back online, reading the statement from the state board’s leaders condemning the post, and a statement by Gov. Spencer Cox and Lt. Governor Deidre Henderson (who said they “denounce behavior” by Cline).
Staff also read through news coverage by KSL (Parents of female student-athlete at the center of controversy call on school board member to resign) and The Tribune (Utah school board promises ‘prompt action’ against Natalie Cline — the Legislature eyes impeachment).
IA also checked Cline’s page again, and saw her previous post had been edited.
Cline apologies, comments on the student’s body
The new version still had Cline’s apology. However, the investigation noted, Cline in the new version mentioned the gender and “physical characteristics and attributes of the student,” as well as the student’s parents.
Specifically, Cline said that friends had reached out to her and confirmed the student was a “biological” girl. “She does have a larger build, like her parents,” Cline wrote. “We live in strange times when it is normal to pause and wonder if people are what they say they are because of the push to normalize transgenderism in our society.”
Analysis day
On Feb. 9, a Friday, with complaints still coming in, staff in the IA department compared what they had read and received to the state board’s bylaws. Members can express personal opinions, but they “shall respect the privacy of students” and others in the education system, the bylaws say, including refraining from identifying any of them “in a negative light in any public setting” where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Cline’s Feb. 6 and Feb. 8 posts were “very” public and appeared to draw negative attention to one particular student, the report said. “Nearly all complaints assert that the post was made to ‘dox,’ ‘humiliate,’ or ‘harass’ one particular student in the Facebook post because of the student’s body type,” the investigation said.
“Doxing” is when someone publicly shares private or personal information about another person without their permission, often with malicious intent.
The IA report recommended that board leadership determine:
• Whether Cline’s social media posts, with their inferences, are ethical and civil.
• Whether Cline respected the privacy of students or painted them in a negative light, and whether they had a “reasonable expectation of privacy.”
• Whether her posts tended to injure the good name of the board or violated a policy that prohibits members from communicating in ways that: “place the board at risk of legal liability, defame board staff or individuals, promote inaccurate information, place board staff or individuals at risk for harm, or incite or encourage violence.”
‘Action required’
Just after 1:30 p.m. on Feb. 9, Michelle Beus, assistant attorney general for the education division, emailed the internal analysis to Cline. “Board Leadership reviewed the documentation and determined there appears to be merit to the concerns,” Bues wrote.
In her response on Feb. 13, Cline accused the board of failing to provide her due process and questioned whether the discipline proceedings were a form of election interference.
The next day, the state board decided to censure her during a special meeting she did not attend. As part of the rare disciplinary action, leaders unanimously voted to prohibit Cline from placing items on board agendas, remove her from all standing committees and forbid her from attending advisory committees. They also requested by unanimous vote that she resign from her position immediately.
Cline has declined to do so. Her Republican opponent, Amanda Bollinger, has already secured enough signatures to guarantee her spot in a June primary. To join her there, Cline must either collect at least 1,715 signatures or capture 40% of delegate votes at the GOP convention.
The Democratic hopeful for Cline’s District 9 seat, William Shiflett, has declared his intent to get signatures but has not yet garnered any. However, he runs uncontested.
Editor’s note • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.
