City OKs aquatic complex equipment contract

Summary#

Montréal city council approved a contract with Aquam Spécialiste Aquatique inc. to supply aquatic equipment for the Complexe aquatique de Pierrefonds-Roxboro in the borough of Pierrefonds-Roxboro. The decision authorizes a total expense of $243,576.45, taxes included, including a contingency budget.

  • The contract was awarded after a public call for tenders. Aquam was the only bidder and its bid was compliant.
  • The contract covers equipment for maintenance, training, recreation and lifesaving.
  • Council authorized $31,770.84, taxes included, for contingencies (a reserve for unforeseen costs).

What it means for you#

  • People using the complex: The decision funds equipment for the new aquatic complex. City staff say delayed delivery could put the planned public opening at risk.
  • Taxpayers: The city’s central administration will pay the expense under borrowing bylaw 18-065.
  • The public: The materials give a delivery period of February to May 2026. They do not say that this decision changes access rules or services at other facilities.

Money#

The authorized expense is $243,576.45, taxes included; the net amount after tax rebates is $222,417.77.

  • The base contract is $211,805.61, taxes included; contingencies are $31,770.84, taxes included.
  • The city’s latest estimate, including contingencies, was $229,811.18. The authorized total is $13,765.27 above that estimate.
  • The decision summary says the cost will be paid by the central city under borrowing bylaw 18-065.

What is unclear#

  • The materials do not list each item of equipment or explain how the contingency money will be used.
  • They give a delivery period, but no contract term or renewal options.

Case for#

  • City staff say the equipment is needed for the complex’s planned opening in summer 2026, and that late delivery could jeopardize it.
  • The city received one bid, and it met the tender requirements. The decision also sets aside contingencies for unforeseen costs.

Case against#

  • With only one bid, the city had no competing bid to compare with Aquam’s price.
  • The total authorized expense is above the city’s latest estimate. The materials do not explain what drove the difference.