Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously adopted a position on four framework agreements to supply bulk fuel for the City of Montréal group. The agreements would run for 36 months, with two extension options and a three-month transition option. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting.
- The proposed agreements name Harnois Énergies inc. for lot 1 ($19,863,885.83), Mazout G. Belanger inc. for lots 2 ($3,172,620.15) and 4 ($1,208,617.20), and Corporation Parkland for lot 3 ($640,663.01). All amounts include taxes.
- The suppliers would provide fuel on demand: regular and premium gasoline, coloured diesel, and heating oil. The agreements set maximum amounts, not guaranteed purchases.
- The resolution also calls for an evaluation of the suppliers’ performance and charges purchases to central-service and linked-municipality budgets as needs arise.
What it means for you#
- City services, boroughs and the 12 participating linked municipalities: They would have access to the agreements for fuel used in vehicles and equipment, some municipal-building heating, and emergency-measures pumps. The City of Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue is not part of this purchasing group.
- Taxpayers in the participating municipalities: Their budgets would pay for fuel actually needed. The estimated quantities are for planning only; the City does not commit to buying them.
- Residents and businesses: The decision does not directly change fuel prices at retail stations, create a new public service, or change residents’ rights.
Money#
The four agreements have an estimated maximum total of $24,885,786.19, taxes included; actual spending depends on orders and fuel needs.
- The lowest compliant bid was selected for each lot. The call for tenders received four bids from five firms that obtained the tender documents; one bidder was ruled non-compliant.
- Fuel prices would adjust weekly using the Québec energy regulator’s published prices. Transport and delivery prices are firm for the first year; later adjustments may use Montréal’s consumer price index, after written notice from the supplier.
- Purchases would be paid from central-service and participating linked-municipality budgets as needs arise. The materials give no separate estimate of actual spending.
What is unclear#
- The lengths of the two extension options are not stated.
- The materials do not say how supplier performance will be evaluated or what would follow from that evaluation.
- Actual fuel quantities and total spending are uncertain because the listed quantities are estimates and fuel prices can change.
Case for#
- City staff say the agreements are intended to make fuel supply more consistent and convenient for City operations and participating municipalities.
- The lowest compliant bids for all four lots were below the City’s latest estimates.
Case against#
- The stated total is an estimate and maximum, not a fixed final cost; actual spending may vary with needs, fuel prices and any extensions.
- The decision requires performance evaluations but does not explain the evaluation method or consequences.