Summary#
Montréal city council adopted a bylaw amending the existing Règlement sur la subvention à la modification du raccordement du service électrique de certains bâtiments (S-6.01) on January 26, 2026. The change concerns the undergrounding project on boulevard Gouin Ouest, between avenues Albert-Prévost and Martin; city staff say the goal is to cover the electrical-connection conversion costs of affected owners.
- The amendment updates which buildings and subsidy amounts are covered for the project. The exact changes are not included in the materials provided.
- The existing bylaw allows the City to subsidize owners’ electrical-connection work linked to undergrounding overhead wires.
- City staff say the changes are intended to cover the full conversion costs for affected owners, making the work effectively “no cost” to them.
- The City’s additional required expenditure is $79,100, taxes included, from its Programme d’élimination des poteaux (Pole Elimination Program) grants account.
What it means for you#
- Owners of affected buildings: The City’s decision provides for subsidies tied to changes to private electrical connections for the Gouin Ouest project. City staff say the intended coverage is the full conversion cost. The materials say owners will be notified by the CSEM after the project work, and that the connection work can then be done.
- Other residents: The decision does not directly change electricity rates, create a general grant for all property owners, or require residents to change their electrical connections.
Money#
The amendment requires an additional $79,100 in City spending, taxes included.
- The amount will be charged to the City’s Programme d’élimination des poteaux grants account.
- No cost per building or owner is given.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not include the amendment’s full text. No publicly available information in the supplied material identifies the exact buildings covered or each revised subsidy amount.
- The exact eligibility rules and how an owner receives or claims a subsidy are not set out in the materials. The existing bylaw text was not supplied, so its full rules could not be checked.
- City staff describe the intended coverage as full conversion costs, but the supplied material does not show the operative wording that would establish how that coverage is calculated.
Case for#
- The bylaw amendment appears intended to adjust subsidies when construction plans change, so owners’ connection work can proceed with the undergrounding project.
- City staff say covering conversion costs is meant to avoid leaving affected owners with those costs.
- Staff say undergrounding would remove overhead poles and wires and could improve the public space and help the network withstand weather-related vulnerabilities.
Case against#
- One concern is the added public cost: the City will spend an additional $79,100, while the materials do not give the cost per building or owner.
- The exact buildings, subsidy amounts and rules are not available here, making it hard to assess whether the funding matches the owners’ costs or how consistently it will be applied.
- The intended “no cost” result depends on how the subsidy is calculated and applied; the supplied materials do not show those details.