# Competitive-Bid Exemption (Sole-Source Procurement) The Arkansas exemption under **§ 14-58-104 §4 Line 44** that allows a municipality to purchase goods or services without competitive bidding when only a single source is available. The text: > "Goods or services available only from a single source. a. A purchase order under this subdivision (44) shall be supported with: i. Documentation concerning the exclusivity of the single source; and ii. A written proclamation from the chief executive filed with the clerk or recorder that sets forth the basis for the single source procurement." (Tier-1 corpus, Arkansas Code § 14-58-104 §4 Line 44, as embedded in [[CLR-2026-778]] Cellebrite, NetMotion, and PowerDMS exemption forms) The Line 44 sole-source path is one of two procurement routes the [[Little Rock Police Department]] uses to acquire surveillance technology without local competitive bidding (the other being [[Cooperative Purchasing Vehicle]], Line 43). ## Distinct exemption tracks within the corpus The corpus contains four LRPD-side exemption forms, two procurement tracks: | Vendor | Form date | Amount | Exemption Line | Signer | Approver | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | **Cellebrite Advanced Services** | 2024-10-14 | $21,136.06 | **#44 (single source)** | [[Latreasa Mullins-Sanders]] | [[Lisa King]] (10/17/24) | | **PowerDMS** | 2024-10-14 | $23,161.97 | **#44 (single source)** | [[Latreasa Mullins-Sanders]] | (Procurement Staff) | | **NetMotion** | 2024-02-12 | $30,064.80 | **#26 (proprietary-software renewal)** | [[Latreasa Mullins-Sanders]] | [[Lisa King]] (2/15/24) | | **i2 (Analyst's Notebook + iBase)** | 2024-01-30 | $11,136.97 | **#18 + #21 (both)** — renewal AND single source | Amanda B. Jones (Grants Manager) | Vitesh Patel (Procurement Manager) | The four-form corpus shows that LRPD's "sole-source" practice is actually three distinct exemption tracks: 1. **Line 21/44 (single source)** — affirmative single-source filing with the chief-executive proclamation. Cellebrite Advanced Services and PowerDMS use this. 2. **Line 18 (renewal)** — renewal or extension of an existing contract. i2 uses Line 18 alongside the single-source rationale (because IBM was the prior vendor, and N. Harris is now the sole supporter of an existing product line). 3. **Line 26 (proprietary-software renewal)** — explicitly available for proprietary-software renewals, additional copies, technical support, and license upgrades. NetMotion uses this — the most permissive sole-source-pattern path because it does not require a chief-executive proclamation. ## How it appears in the corpus — the affirmative-filing pattern For Cellebrite, PowerDMS, and NetMotion, the corpus contains the actual signed exemption form (with the corresponding section of the Arkansas Appendix I attached on a second page). The exemption form is straightforward — a one-page request stating department, amount, exemption line, signer, date, and approver. The Arkansas Appendix I (lines 1-44 of the exemption commodities-and-services list) is then attached as a second page of the form. The corpus also contains the **substantive justification text** for the NetMotion #26 exemption — a multi-paragraph technical explanation of why NetMotion's product is uniquely suited to LRPD's CJIS-compliance requirements. See [[NetMotion]] for the full quote. ## How it appears in the corpus — the i2 affirmative-filing pattern The i2 exemption form (signed by **Amanda B. Jones, Grants Manager**, not Mullins-Sanders) embeds the substantive justification on the same page as the exemption-request fields: > "Bid occurred previously for this software (iBase, Analyst Notebook) that is used by Special Investigations, Real time Crime Center, and Gun Crimes Intelligence Unit. IBM was the initial contracted vendor (Contract 426) however IBM no longer supports this software and N. Harris Computer Corporation is the sole supporter." (Tier-1 corpus, Competitive Exemption Form_Approved.pdf, p. 1) This is the corpus's clearest documentary anchor for the **IBM-to-N. Harris i2 product transition** of 2022. ## Comparison with the Conway pattern The corpus's Conway counterpart to Line 44 is [[Sole-Source Procurement Language Avoidance]] — where Conway's actors (specifically [[Tiffany Maddox]]) instructed Conway PD's drafter to *remove* the word "sole source" from ordinance language to avoid the Arkansas filing requirement. Little Rock and Conway thus take *mirror-image* approaches to the same competition-avoiding end: - **Conway:** strip the word "sole source" from the ordinance so the Arkansas filing regime does not attach. - **Little Rock:** affirmatively file the Line 44 form with chief-executive proclamation, documenting the sole-source basis. Both procurement paths reduce open competition; they document differently. The corpus's analytic observation is that Conway's path is procedurally evasive of the Arkansas regime while Little Rock's is procedurally compliant — but both narrow the procurement universe to a vendor-chosen single source. ## Stakeholders - **City of Little Rock procurement staff:** [[Lisa King]] (Senior Procurement Analyst, approver for most LRPD sole-source filings), Vitesh Patel (Procurement Manager, approver for the i2 / Finance-Grants filing). - **LRPD finance:** [[Latreasa Mullins-Sanders]] (signer for Cellebrite, PowerDMS, NetMotion). - **Finance/Grants:** Amanda B. Jones (signer for i2). - **Vendors with sole-source-rationale relationships at LRPD:** Cellebrite (Advanced Services lab work), NEOGOV/PowerDMS (policy/training management), NetMotion (cellular VPN), N. Harris Computer Corporation/i2. ## Timeline - **2024-01-30:** i2 exemption filed (Lines 18 + 21). - **2024-02-12:** NetMotion exemption filed (Line 26). - **2024-10-14:** Cellebrite Advanced Services exemption filed (Line 44). - **2024-10-14:** PowerDMS exemption filed (Line 44). - **2024-10-17:** Lisa King approves the Cellebrite Advanced Services exemption. - **2024-02-15:** Lisa King approves the NetMotion exemption. ## Notes - The Arkansas Code Appendix I (the list of exemption commodities and services, Lines 1-44) appears as a 2-page attachment to each LRPD exemption form. The full enumeration is in the corpus as Tier-1 material; specific pages of the appendix are cited from individual exemption forms above. - See [[Cooperative Purchasing Vehicle]] for the parallel exemption track (Line 43) that LRPD uses for Flock, Watchguard M500, Utility, and other surveillance buys. - The Conway↔Little Rock procurement-mechanism comparison is also discussed on [[Sole-Source Procurement Language Avoidance]] and is a candidate for synthesis-essay treatment. ## Pulaski County (PCSO) — the counter-pattern (no exemption used) The [[_overview|Pulaski County `#26-365`]] production documents a procurement that **did NOT use any competitive-bid exemption**. PCSO's Flock procurement went through [[Competitive RFP Procurement (Arkansas Counties)|actual competitive RFP procurement]] (RFP-23-003) — a public solicitation through [[ARBid]], 4-bidder competition, scored evaluation, award to highest-scoring vendor. No Line-21, Line-26, Line-43, or Line-44 exemption was invoked. This is the corpus's first documented Arkansas LE-agency ALPR procurement that **did not** circumvent the competitive-bidding requirement. The cross-jurisdictional comparison now spans four procurement tracks: | Jurisdiction | Procurement track | Statutory basis | |---|---|---| | Conway PD | Sole-source via language laundering | Local ordinance; avoids Arkansas state-level filing | | LRPD (most surveillance vendors) | Cooperative purchasing | § 14-58-104 §4 Line 43 | | LRPD (Cellebrite, PowerDMS, etc.) | Sole-source exemption (affirmative filing) | § 14-58-104 §4 Line 21/26/44 | | **PCSO (Flock)** | **Competitive RFP** | **No exemption — competitive bidding completed** | The Pulaski County procurement is therefore the corpus's most procurement-law-compliant Arkansas Flock acquisition — though, as noted on [[Competitive RFP Procurement (Arkansas Counties)]], it is also the **lowest-visibility** to citizens because the County's competitive-RFP procurement did not require a [[Pulaski County Quorum Court|Quorum Court]] vote or any legislative-body deliberation.