City extends biology services for parks

Summary#

Montréal city council adopted a position supporting a 12-month extension of its framework agreement with Stantec experts-conseils ltée for biology-related professional and technical services. It also supported an additional spending authorization, including a contingency budget. City staff say the goal is to continue studies and expertise for park projects and ecological management.

  • The extension would run from April 19, 2026, to April 18, 2027.
  • The additional amount is $1,264,392.63, taxes included: $1,099,471.85 for contracts and $164,920.78 for contingencies.
  • The extension would bring the agreement’s total to $3,732,831.15, taxes included.
  • The city council’s decision sets the city’s position; the agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting.

What it means for you#

  • City parks service: If the extension receives final approval, the Service des grands parcs, du Mont-Royal et des sports can continue assigning Stantec work in biology and geomatics (mapping and location-based data) for various projects.
  • Residents: The decision does not directly change residents’ rights, fees, or access to parks.
  • Taxpayers: The spending is to be charged to the service’s operating and capital budgets as needs arise.

Money#

The city council supported an additional spending amount of $1,264,392.63, taxes included; the final decision rests with the agglomeration council.

  • The amount includes $164,920.78 for contingencies. The agreement is paid by hourly rates.
  • City staff estimate prices using 2025 rates and a 2% adjustment. The contract allows adjustment up or down based on Canada’s Consumer Price Index if the change exceeds 2%.
  • Staff say the required budgets are provided for in the service’s operating and capital budgets. The decision summary does not give a separate cost estimate for the work actually assigned.

What is unclear#

  • The materials do not say how many bids were received for the original 2024 public call for tenders, or whether Stantec submitted the lowest compliant bid.
  • The total value of work that will actually be assigned during the extension is not specified; the agreement is a framework agreement, with assignments made as needs arise.
  • The materials do not give the final agglomeration council decision.

Case for#

  • City staff say the service needs further expertise for park development projects and ecological management activities.
  • Staff say not renewing would require a new call for tenders and could affect the service’s ability to carry out projects that need preliminary studies.
  • Staff report satisfactory performance by Stantec and say the extension would allow the city to continue using the existing agreement.

Case against#

  • The extension adds $1,264,392.63, taxes included, and raises the agreement’s total by 51.2% from its original value, according to city staff.
  • The agreement allows price adjustments based on the Consumer Price Index, so the final cost of assigned work may differ from the estimate.
  • The materials do not provide the original bid count or comparison with other bids, making it hard to assess the basis for continuing with Stantec rather than seeking new bids.