Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trumbull County Board of Elections defends pay and overtime changes, says it is not violating federal labor law
Summary
Board of Elections officials told commissioners they are not violating the Fair Labor Standards Act and that, as an autonomous appointing authority, the board is not required to follow the county wage-and-salary schedule; commissioners said they want clearer comparative data before final budget allocations.
Officials from the Trumbull County Board of Elections told commissioners the board is not in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and defended recent restructuring of salaries and job classifications.
Board of Elections representatives said the board’s director and deputy director are exempt employees under federal law and that providing additional compensation to exempt employees does not forfeit their exempt status. “An employer may provide an exempt employee with additional compensation without losing the exemption,” a board representative said, reading a legal opinion and asking the record to be corrected.
Why it matters: Commissioners had questioned the board’s 2025 budget request and compared it to other counties. Board officials asked the commissioners not to “cherry pick” peer examples and urged a cross‑county comparison of like-sized jurisdictions, and they warned that underfunding the elections office could hamper mandated election operations such as absentee mailings, ballot procurement and cybersecurity maintenance.
Key points - Compliance and jurisdiction: The Board of Elections said it is an autonomous appointing authority and not required to follow the county’s wage‑and‑salary schedule. The board said legal review shows it is not violating FLSA rules on exempt status. - Budget impact: The board warned that the requested resources fund legally required election functions — poll worker recruitment and training, absentee and campaign mailings, ballot purchasing, cybersecurity and contracted maintenance for scanners and voter‑registration software. The board said cuts would risk “not be able to purchase the sufficient number of ballots for 2 county wide elections” and other mandated obligations. - Comparative data: Commissioners and the board discussed pay comparisons (Portage and Mahoning counties were cited in conversation); the board said it had attempted to provide comparative data and pledged to submit the underlying compilations to commissioners for review.
Ending Commissioners said they intend to continue budget deliberations and asked for the Board of Elections’ comparative compensation data. The elections office said it would send a memorandum describing potential operational impacts if the county does not increase funding.
