WARREN — A dispute over salary increases given to the director and deputy director of the Trumbull County Board of Elections is escalating between board members and county officials, including Commissioner Denny Malloy.

The board on Wednesday voted 4-0 on a resolution to “address recent false and misleading allegations” made by Malloy and county Human Resources Director Alexandra DeVengencie-Bush calling into question if the pay increases comply with federal labor laws — as the two officials are salaried — and the county’s wage and salary policy.

Malloy said he and DeVengenice-Bush asked if the pay increases violated federal law because the two top election officials are salaried employees and are the only directors in the county who received overtime.

Malloy said: “We didn’t say it was illegal, but we want them to abide by some rules and standards. We’re not contesting whether or not they can do it, we’re saying it’s improper to give those raises during a budget crunch.”

The board of elections raised the annual salaries of Director Stephanie Penrose and Deputy Director Edrea Mientkiewicz from $71,790 to $96,808. The board did this in June 2024 to put the two on straight salaries rather than pay them overtime.

In 2024, Penrose made $5,522 in overtime and Mientkiewicz made $5,796. But in 2023, Penrose made about $23,000 and Mientkiewicz earned $21,000.

Board Chairman Mark Alberini said what the board did was “legal and compliant.”

He also accused the commissioners of retaliation by cutting the elections board’s $2.1 million budget request for this year to $1.7 million and that county officials are withholding other funds and basic items over the pay issue.

Alberini, who is also the county Democratic Party chairman, said Malloy, a Republican, is “retaliating” against the elections board because of issues he has with Marleah Campbell, a board member and secretary of the county Republican Party.

“It’s a pattern of behavior that I believe stems from inner-party Republican fighting and to use the board of elections as a lever is wrong,” Alberini said. “I’m concerned about our ability to have a November election that is fully funded and staffed.”

Malloy said the claim is ridiculous and while he and Campbell don’t get along, the issue is the board wanted to be funded almost as much as it was in 2024, during a very busy presidential election, while this year is a light election year. It’s particularly egregious because of the raises and that the county is facing financial hardships, Malloy said.

“It’s all smoke and mirrors,” Malloy said. “We have a lot of great employees at the board of elections and $47,000 is the next highest salary while the top two are making more than $96,000. It’s abuse of taxpayer dollars. It’s not me saying it’s illegal. But it’s improper and unethical to feed at the trough. They’re allowed to do it.”

The elections board resolution states the “compensation changes were misrepresented,” and the board “restructured the compensation plans to move the director and deputy director to fixed salaries, thereby eliminating variable overtime costs. Their total compensation remains consistent with prior years (2022-2024). What has been changed by the board of elections is the elimination of overtime wages and director and deputy director compensatory time has been reduced and capped.”

Malloy said Penrose cashed in 416 hours of compensatory time and Mientkiewicz cashed in 583 hours a couple of months ago. Based on their hourly wages, Penrose received $19,362 in a comp time payment while Mientkiewicz got a $27,133 comp time payment.

“That’s taxpayer money, and they’re over there making as much money as they can,” Malloy said. “That’s abuse.”

The elections board on Wednesday provided a legal opinion from William J. Danso, assistant county prosecutor, who wrote that the pay structure for the two officials doesn’t violate federal law or the county policy of paying them hourly wages and overtime.

Danso wrote that while the county’s personal policy limits overtime for exempt employees, “the board of elections policy contains very little guidance on exempt employees. It also appears to draw no distinction in overtime pay between exempt and nonexempt employees. In fact, it appears that this policy manual classifies both the director and deputy director as nonexempt.”

Alberini said Clark Schaefer Hackett, a firm conducting an audit of the county, got an anonymous tip about the overtime issue and investigated. The elections board resolution stated Malloy and DeVengezie-Bush made allegations that the board was violating county policy.

The anonymous tip claimed the two officials shouldn’t have received overtime and incorrectly listed the overtime they received in 2023 as money they received in 2024.

The audit firm states that it discovered that the timesheets “appear to be in accordance with (board) policy for OT earned at 1.5 times salary for any hours over 40. However, it was noted that there was no indication or approval on the OT sheets. Potential area for internal control improvement.”

While Alberini described the work by CSH as a “special audit,” Malloy said that is a mischaracterization. He said a complaint came in and the firm took a brief look into the overtime and discovered that no one was overseeing it, which will likely lead to a noncompliance finding.

“They never did an audit,” Malloy said. “They checked into a couple of things and found that no one is monitoring overtime.”

An Ohio auditor spokesman recently said no special audit was done of the Trumbull Board of Elections.