Park invasive-plant control contract

Summary#

Montréal city council unanimously set its position in favour of awarding a contract to Nature-Action Québec inc. for invasive-plant control in the large parks. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting. The stated goal is to protect the parks’ natural areas and biodiversity.

  • The proposed contract runs from March 1, 2026, to December 31, 2028, for a total maximum cost of $1,730,971.08, including taxes.
  • It would be awarded directly to Nature-Action Québec, a non-profit, under a legal exception for contracts with non-profits. The city requested a price from this organization; the material does not describe a competitive call for tenders.
  • The work includes manual cutting, pulling, encapsulating and folding invasive plants; some motorized cutting; coordinating and supervising the work; tracking treated areas; and removing plant waste.
  • City biologists would set the objectives, methods and timelines for each assignment. The contract would also require an evaluation of the contractor’s performance.

What it means for you#

  • Park visitors and the public: The work is planned across Montréal’s large parks. City staff say manual interventions can limit harm to species valued for conservation; this is an expected benefit, not a guaranteed result.
  • Taxpayers: The agglomeration would cover the full cost through borrowing bylaw RCG 21-016. The decision does not create a new tax or fee.
  • Nature-Action Québec: If the agglomeration council approves the contract, the organization would provide the listed services under the city biologists’ direction.

Money#

The maximum total is $1,730,971.08, including taxes; the amount after tax rebates is $1,726,794.31.

  • The contract price is $1,602,751, with no taxes applicable.
  • The contingency budget is $80,137.55, with no taxes applicable; the incidental-expense budget is $48,082.53, including taxes.
  • The total is 0.67% above the city’s latest internal estimate.

What is unclear#

  • The material does not specify how much of the contingency or incidental-expense budgets will be spent.
  • It does not set out how the performance evaluation will be conducted or what happens if performance is unsatisfactory.

Case for#

  • A possible argument for the contract is that it funds targeted work to control invasive plants in large parks.
  • City staff say manual methods can limit impacts on species valued for conservation and support natural restoration.
  • The quoted price was close to the city’s estimate: 0.67% higher.

Case against#

  • The city requested a price from one organization rather than holding a competitive call for tenders, so the material does not show how the price compares with other suppliers’ bids.
  • The decision authorizes a substantial maximum cost, but the material does not say how much of the contingency and incidental-expense budgets will be used.