Solicitor General secures two‑year, sole‑source case‑management system agreement

DeKalb County Finance, Audit and Budget Committee · November 10, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Solicitor General sought and the committee approved a two‑year sole‑source agreement with Carpel Computer Systems (d/b/a Carpel Solutions) to provide a prosecutor case management system, including installation and annual subscription, for an amount not to exceed $392,837.

The Finance, Audit and Budget Committee approved a two‑year sole‑source agreement for a prosecutor case management system to be used by the Office of the Solicitor General.

Solicitor General Coleman Shibley presented the item as a ratification and continuation of services with Carpel Computer Systems (doing business as Carpel Solutions), describing the product as a prosecutor‑designed case management system to improve e‑discovery, digital evidence handling and internal reporting. Brandon McMurray, the Solicitor General’s IT staff, told the committee the system is ‘‘designed by prosecutors for prosecutors’’ and will allow the office to pull cases faster and better manage digital evidence.

Shibley said the system has been vetted over nearly two years of conversations and is in use by over 500 prosecution offices across 33 states; the contract value for the county was presented as not to exceed $392,837 for a two‑year agreement. The Solicitor General clarified the purchase is for the office’s internal case management, not the county’s core system or separate digital evidence systems.

Committee members recalled lengthy prior discussions this year, asked no further questions at this meeting, and approved the request by voice vote.

The transcript records the amount and the vendor name as presented by the Solicitor General and IT staff; it does not include a procurement justification beyond the sole‑source designation or comparative procurement documents in the public record.