Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously set its position in favour of authorizing an additional $536,301.40, taxes included, for Bell Canada’s existing framework agreements for traditional telephone services. The city’s position is for the agglomeration council, which makes the final decision at a later meeting. The stated goal is to cover additional telephone needs and unexpected costs.
- The proposed addition is a contingency budget for Lot 2, which covers digital and analog telephone services.
- If approved by the agglomeration council, the total for the agreements would rise to $18,294,324.12, taxes included.
- The agreements were originally for 36 months and included two 12-month renewal options. The first extension runs from October 27, 2025, to October 26, 2026.
- City staff say the added budget could cover more than 30 telephone and communication services and products, including shared voicemail and internet fax. Staff validation would be required for spending under this authorization.
What it means for you#
- Residents: This does not directly change residents’ telephone services, fees or rights. City staff say the added services are intended to support municipal operations, including public safety and services such as call centres.
- City services: If the agglomeration council approves the city’s position, the City could use the added budget for traditional telephone needs as they arise, including changes in quantities.
- Bell Canada: The additional spending would be under the existing framework agreements, not a new contract awarded by this decision.
Money#
The proposed additional spending is $536,301.40, taxes included ($489,714.66 net of tax rebates).
- The resolution says the spending would come from the operating budget of the City’s Information Technology Service, as needs arise.
- The decision summary says expenses may include agglomeration expenses, with budget commitments and the sharing of costs assessed according to the needs and applicable cost-sharing rules.
- The materials do not give a separate estimate of how much of the contingency will actually be spent.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not say which specific services or products will be purchased, or how much of the contingency each will use.
- The final decision by the agglomeration council is not included in these materials.
- The materials do not give a bid count or say whether the added spending was compared with bids from other suppliers. The agreements were originally awarded through a public call for tenders.
Case for#
- A possible argument for using the existing agreement is that it can provide additional telephone services without starting separate purchasing processes.
- City staff say the added services would address needs identified after the original agreement and support continuity of municipal communications, including in public safety.
Case against#
- One concern is that the added spending covers a broad range of services and possible changes in quantities, but the materials do not specify which purchases will be made.
- The decision adds to the total commitment under existing agreements; the materials do not show whether another purchasing approach was considered for these additional needs.