Clark County Board Approves New VOIP Phone System for Courthouse

Clark County Board Regular Meeting | May 15, 2026

Article Summary: The Clark County Board on May 15, 2026, unanimously approved a VOIP phone system after the county’s IT director reported the current system keeps going down and having to be reset. The minutes record no cost, no contract term, and no vendor agreement.

Courthouse Phone System Key Points:

• IT Director Alex Carrell said the current phone system has been going down and requiring resets.
• The Health Department is already using the Gibson system and really likes it; Carrell’s goal is to have the whole county on the same system.
• Steve McGee with Gibson said the change has the potential to save the county money and would add mobile app capability and voicemail-to-email.
• The motion by Todd Kuhn, seconded by Brandon Burkybile, passed unanimously. No price appears anywhere in the record.

CLARK COUNTY — The Clark County Board on Friday, May 15, 2026, unanimously approved a VOIP phone system for the courthouse, acting on a recommendation from the county’s information technology director after repeated failures of the existing system.

IT Director Alex Carrell informed the board that the current phone system has been having issues with it going down and having to be reset, according to the minutes. The Health Department is currently using the Gibson system and really likes it, Carrell said, and his goal is to have the whole county on the same system.

Steve McGee with Gibson told the board the change has the potential to save the county money and upgrade the current system, the minutes record. McGee cited mobile app capability and voicemail-to-email options among the features.

Kuhn moved for approval and Burkybile seconded. All members present voted aye, and Chairman Rex Goble declared the motion adopted. The minutes note “(See attached)” following the vote.

Approved without a price in the record

The attachment referenced in the minutes was not among the materials released for the meeting, and the minutes themselves contain no dollar figure. The record does not state what the system will cost, what the county is paying now, how much money McGee’s potential savings would amount to, over what term, whether the purchase covers the courthouse alone or the countywide rollout Carrell described as his goal, or whether a contract, quote or proposal was before the board when it voted.

The board’s agenda carries the item as “Discuss and Possible Approval of VOIP Phone System for Courthouse.” The minutes’ own heading drops the courthouse reference and reads simply “Discuss and Possible Approval of VOIP Phone System.”

Gibson is not further identified in the record. The company appears on the meeting’s attendance line as McGee’s affiliation and nowhere else. The minutes do not give its full legal name, its location, or the nature of its business beyond the phone system the Health Department uses.

The attachment referenced in the minutes is the document that would supply the cost and the terms.