Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously adopted its position on a 10-year shared purchasing agreement with Aréo-Feu ltée for breathing equipment and related services for Montréal and Longueuil fire services. The city is asking the agglomeration council to approve the agreement; that council makes the final decision at a later meeting.
- The agreement would let each fire service order equipment, accessories, training, installation, maintenance, repairs and replacement parts as needed.
- The agreement’s maximum is $21,855,393.44, including taxes. The decision also authorizes $3,278,309.01 for contingencies and the same amount for changes in quantities, bringing the total maximum to $28,412,011.46, including taxes.
- The shared public call for tenders received two bids. Aréo-Feu was the only bidder to pass the pre-set evaluation criteria; the other bid was rejected as technically non-compliant.
- The decision requires an evaluation of Aréo-Feu’s performance.
What it means for you#
- Montréal and Longueuil firefighters: Their services could order new breathing equipment and related supplies and services over 10 years. Orders would be made as needs arise, so the agreement does not require buying all forecast quantities.
- The two fire services: Each would manage its own purchases and contract responsibilities. The agreement covers equipment deployment and setup, training, maintenance and repairs, replacement parts, and specified options including rechargeable batteries and geolocation.
- Residents and taxpayers: The decision does not directly change residents’ services, taxes or fees. It would support equipment purchases for the two fire services if the agglomeration council approves the agreement.
Money#
The maximum authorized total is $28,412,011.46, including taxes; actual purchases would depend on each service’s needs.
- The base agreement is capped at $21,855,393.44: $17,480,411.35 for Montréal’s fire service and $4,374,982.09 for Longueuil’s.
- The two additional budgets are each $3,278,309.01, including taxes: one for contingencies and one for quantity changes.
- The decision summary says Montréal’s portion, 80% of the total maximum, would be fully funded by the agglomeration. Each participating organization is responsible for the costs of its own purchases; Montréal would not pay Longueuil’s portion.
What is unclear#
- The final decision by the agglomeration council is not included in the materials.
- The actual equipment quantities and timing of orders are not fixed; they would depend on needs during the agreement.
- The materials do not say how often the equipment will be ordered or what share of the maximum each service will ultimately use.
Case for#
- City staff say current equipment is nearing or at the end of its useful life, creating maintenance and replacement-parts concerns.
- Staff say shared specifications and equipment could support compatibility during joint responses and help maintain continuity of operations.
- The agreement combines equipment, training, maintenance and parts supply under one 10-year arrangement. The sole compliant bid was below the city’s estimate.
Case against#
- Only one of the two bids was compliant, so there was limited competition among bids that met the requirements.
- The agreement lasts 10 years and allows spending up to the stated maximum, but actual purchases and their timing are not specified.
- The materials do not explain what alternatives were considered if the agglomeration council does not approve the agreement.