# ASP In-Car Camera Transition from 4RE Servers to VideoManager Cloud The fiscal package supports a bounded lifecycle finding: ASP operated a WatchGuard/Motorola 4RE in-car-video architecture in 2023-2024, described that existing fleet system in May 2025 as end-of-life and server-based, and then issued purchase orders for 550 initial in-car camera systems and modems plus a Year-1 VideoManager Evidence Library cloud subscription. The records do not identify the 2025 camera model or prove delivery, installation, acceptance, activation, migration, or completed purchase of the additional 150 replacement systems. ## Evidence ### The documented baseline The November 2023 and March 2024 orders each list fifty `"4RE, HD DVR, GEN 2, 200GB HDD"` systems with associated displays, front and infrared cameras, microphones, installation equipment, warranty, and VideoManager EL annual licensing/support (`raw/arkansas-state-police/2026-07-31-motorola-watchguard-fiscal/4502186562.pdf`, pp. 1-3; `4502204877.pdf`, pp. 1-3). The first identifies [[WatchGuard Video]] and the second [[Motorola Solutions]], while both retain vendor number `100117086` and outline agreement `4600050074`. The separate March 2023 order documents the same 4RE product family at `$264,773.44` including tax but uses lump-sum lines without an express device quantity (`4502139928.pdf`, pp. 1-2, `"COMMUNICATION EQ SUP, MISC,LUMP SUM"`; `"Total net item value USD including tax $ 264,773.44"`). ### The replacement decision On May 7, 2025, ASP's solicitation-review memo stated: > `"This procurement is to replace the existing in car camera system for the ASP Fleet. Current system is end of life (EOL) and server based. The new system is cloud based."` (`raw/arkansas-state-police/2026-07-31-motorola-watchguard-fiscal/SolicitationforReviewMemo_20260730203043.169_X 4600056398.pdf`, p. 1) The memo estimates `$4,231,414`, names `"Special Revenues and Federal Revenues"`, and describes 700 systems - 550 initial and 150 replacements - plus 550 modems and cloud-storage, installation, and implementation services (same file, p. 1). ### The initial equipment-order sequence Four later orders expressly list 125, 150, 125, and 150 `"In-Car Camera Systems + Modems"` (`4502282352.pdf`, p. 1; `4502282519.pdf`, p. 1; `4502313985.pdf`, p. 1; `4502314226.pdf`, p. 1). Their sum is 550, matching the memo's initial-system count. Their on-face totals are `$2,353,306.50` net and `$2,556,279.19` including tax. The matching quantity does not identify the replacement hardware model. None of the four orders says 4RE, M500, M500E, or another model. ### The cloud-services order PO `4502304706` orders `"Year 1 - Services"` and `"VIDEO MANAGER EVIDENCE LIBRARY CLOUD SUBSCRIPTION"` for `$652,464.00` net and `$708,739.02` including tax (`4502304706.pdf`, p. 1). It shares outline agreement `4600056398` with the equipment orders. This connects the fiscal paper to a named cloud product but does not establish storage capacity, retention, users, permissions, service dates, or operational cutover. ## Financial boundary The four equipment orders plus the Year-1 cloud order total `$3,265,018.21` including tax. That produced-order sum is not the same measure as the memo's `$4,231,414` projected contract cost: the package lacks the contract, quote, specifications, installation/implementation pricing, renewal structure, invoices, and 150-replacement-system procurement needed for a complete reconciliation. [[T043 - ASP Fiscal Transmittal Contracts Label vs Purchase-Order-Only Package|T043]] keeps that boundary explicit. ## Cross-jurisdiction significance ASP adds a fourth documented storage posture to [[Digital Evidence Management Cloud]]: - [[Little Rock Police Department]] moved local video to a dual-vendor cloud architecture. - [[Faulkner County Sheriff's Office]] bought CommandCentral Evidence as a five-year Video-as-a-Service. - [[Benton County Sheriff's Office]] expressly described its WatchGuard storage as on-premises. - ASP's own memo identifies an end-of-life server-based fleet system and a cloud-based replacement, with a separate VideoManager Evidence Library cloud order. The comparison shows that WatchGuard/Motorola hardware does not determine a single storage posture. Agency procurement and migration decisions do. ## Caveats - No produced record names the 2025 camera or modem model. - Purchase orders do not prove delivery, installation, acceptance, activation, invoice, or payment. - The 150 replacement systems described in the memo are not represented by a produced purchase order. - No separately executed agreement, quote, award, addendum, specifications, or cloud terms appear; see T043. - Several handwritten fiscal dates postdate printed order and delivery dates. Their meaning is bracketed at [[T044 - ASP Purchase-Order Dates vs Later Fiscal Signatures|T044]]. - The records contain no camera locations or coordinates and do not change [[Arkansas Camera Map Data]]. ## Open questions - Which hardware and modem models replaced the 4RE fleet? - When were the 550 initial systems delivered, installed, accepted, and activated? - When and how will the 150 replacements be acquired? - What are the cloud retention, access, sharing, audit, export, deletion, security, breach, data-residency, renewal, and termination terms? - What funding accounts and federal program supplied the Special and Federal Revenues? - When did the server-to-cloud migration and operational cutover occur?