Summary#
Montréal city council adopted this decision on January 26, 2026. It awards the Société des Amis du Biodôme de Montréal a direct contract for administrative and financial management of Espace pour la vie’s 2026 day camps, and approves the related service agreement and budget. City staff say the goal is to deliver the camps for children.
- The contract is for $336,185, taxes included, for the 2026 season. No renewal option is stated.
- The Society must manage camp finances and administration, collect registration income and remit it to the City, hire group monitors, and offer and run the childcare service.
- Espace pour la vie sets the camp offer and fees, coordinates the camps, and provides the scientific activities.
- Council authorized an additional $431,115 in both revenue and spending, based on estimated camp receipts, for the camps’ contract and other operating costs.
- The camps have 868 places for 2026. City staff estimate that about 200 to 220 children from lower-income backgrounds will receive free access through Fondation Espace pour la vie funding.
What it means for you#
- Parents and children: The decision funds administration and delivery of the 2026 camps, scheduled from June to late August. It does not set camp fees; Espace pour la vie does.
- The Society: It receives the contract and takes on the administrative, financial, staffing, and childcare duties described above.
- Montréal taxpayers: The City’s central administration bears the expenses. Staff say an estimated $169,360 gap between total camp expenses and estimated revenue is covered by an existing Espace pour la vie budget.
Money#
The contract costs $336,185, taxes included; the camps’ total estimated expenses are $600,475.
- The $431,115 additional spending authorization matches estimated additional revenue, including expected camp and childcare fees and Fondation Espace pour la vie contributions.
- The remaining estimated $169,360 is budgeted within Espace pour la vie. City staff say that if estimated revenue is reached, the additional budget will not affect the City’s financial framework.
- The contract was awarded directly, rather than through a call for tenders. The materials do not give competing bids or a comparison of prices.
What is unclear#
- The agreement’s detailed terms, including payment schedule and any performance requirements, are not included here.
- Actual registration revenue and foundation contributions may differ from estimates. The materials do not say what happens if they fall short.
- The decision does not give the number of monitors to be hired or a breakdown of how the contract price was set.
Case for#
- City staff say the Society has managed these camps since 2018 and has shown it can manage the required staff and finances.
- Staff say the camps could not be offered without the Society’s collaboration.
- The camps combine science activities and childcare, with free places planned for children from lower-income backgrounds.
Case against#
- A direct award means the materials provide no competitive bid comparison to show whether the contract price offers good value.
- Estimated camp expenses exceed estimated revenues by $169,360, which must be covered by an existing City budget.
- The decision does not provide detailed agreement terms or explain how the City will assess the Society’s performance.