Summary#
Montréal city council adopted a decision awarding CGI Environnement inc. a contract to rehabilitate sewer pipes in various streets in the borough of Rosemont–La Petite-Patrie. The decision authorizes a maximum total expenditure of $12,713,532.45, taxes included. City staff say the goal is to renew sewer infrastructure using a trenchless method.
- The contract is for about 10.7 kilometres of sewer pipes.
- CGI Environnement was the lowest compliant bidder with an experience clause. Three firms submitted bids.
- The decision also authorizes $1,138,695.24 for contingencies and $187,884.72 for related costs, both taxes included.
- The City must evaluate CGI Environnement’s performance under the contract.
What it means for you#
- Residents and businesses in Rosemont–La Petite-Patrie: Sewer rehabilitation will take place on various streets. The list of streets is not included in the supplied materials. City staff say the trenchless method is intended to reduce disruption and keep traffic moving; these are expected benefits, not guarantees.
- Taxpayers: The decision says a portion of the work is eligible for 94% funding through the TECQ24 program. The remaining work, with a net cost of $696,548.98, is at taxpayers’ expense.
- CGI Environnement: The company must complete the work under the contract. For each day it is late, it must pay a penalty of 0.1% of the contract price, excluding taxes and contingencies, with a minimum penalty of $1,000 per day. The tender provides no bonus.
Money#
The maximum authorized expenditure is $12,713,532.45, taxes included.
- The contract itself is $11,386,952.49; contingencies are $1,138,695.24; and related costs are $187,884.72.
- The total is $11,609,149.72 net of tax rebates. The decision assigns the expense to the City’s central administration, under borrowing bylaw 22-046.
- City staff say part of the work is eligible for 94% TECQ24 funding. The other part has a net cost of $696,548.98 charged to taxpayers. The exact subsidy amount is not stated.
- CGI’s bid was 21.16% below the City’s estimate and 0.71% below the second-lowest compliant bid.
What is unclear#
- No publicly available information in the supplied materials gives the contract’s duration or work schedule.
- No publicly available information in the supplied materials lists the streets where work will take place.
- The total amount of TECQ24 funding and the precise split between eligible and taxpayer-funded work are not stated.
- The decision requires a performance evaluation, but its results and the criteria for that evaluation are not provided.
Case for#
- City staff say trenchless rehabilitation can be faster and less disruptive than replacing pipes by excavation, while reducing excavation materials and emissions.
- The winning bid was below the City’s estimate and close to the second-lowest compliant bid.
- Staff say delaying the work could mean some pipes need more costly reconstruction instead of rehabilitation.
Case against#
- The authorized total includes more than $1.3 million for contingencies and related costs on top of the contract price.
- The winning bid was substantially below the estimate. City staff explain that a high estimated price for one major work item drove much of the gap, but the difference leaves uncertainty about how actual costs will compare with the estimate.
- The supplied materials do not give the schedule or identify the streets, limiting residents’ ability to assess the local effects.