Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously adopted a position to conclude a framework agreement with 9140-2594 Québec inc. (Construction Arcade) for general work at the City’s water treatment plants, pumping stations and reservoirs. The agreement would last 36 months, with two 12-month renewal options; the agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting.
- The proposed agreement would let the City order a range of construction, repair, maintenance and related work as needed, up to $14,176,599.60, taxes included.
- The orientation also authorizes $300,000, taxes included, for incidental work, bringing the stated total to $14,476,599.60.
- Construction Arcade was the lowest compliant bidder. Three bids were submitted; two were compliant.
- The contractor would be evaluated on its performance. City staff say the contractor must be available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to respond to service calls.
What it means for you#
- Montréal residents: City staff say the agreement is intended to support upkeep and repairs at water facilities and help maintain the drinking-water service. It does not directly change household water bills or create a new service for residents.
- Construction Arcade: If the agreement proceeds, it would supply work when ordered by the City, subject to the agreement’s terms and spending limits.
- City water service: The work would be paid for as needs arise, through orders under the agreement. The resolution assigns the expense to the Service de l’eau’s budgets.
Money#
The stated total is $14,476,599.60, taxes included; the materials give a net cost after tax rebates of $13,219,065.02.
- The contract amount is capped at $14,176,599.60, plus a separate $300,000 for incidental work.
- The cost is to be fully borne by the agglomeration, using the drinking-water service’s capital and operating budgets, within annual budget limits.
- City staff estimate each 12-month renewal option at $5,198,086.52, taxes included.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not clearly explain whether the stated contract cap includes the two renewal options. The option cost estimates appear separately.
- The resolution sets a maximum amount but the agreement is for work ordered as needed. The materials do not say how much work will actually be ordered.
- The council’s decision is an orientation to the agglomeration council, not the final decision on the agreement.
Case for#
- City staff say several water facilities are aging and need ongoing work. A framework agreement could let the City order repairs and maintenance without holding a new call for tenders for each job.
- Staff say this could shorten response times for urgent repairs and help prevent failures that could affect drinking-water production.
- The selected bid was the lowest compliant bid, and its price was 0.59% above the City’s estimate.
Case against#
- The agreement could cost up to $14,476,599.60, including incidental work, and the materials do not clearly show whether renewal options fit within that total.
- Only three bids were submitted, and one was found non-compliant. The materials say some firms did not bid because of other major projects, the bond amount or lack of time.
- The contract creates a way to order work, but the materials do not specify how much work will be ordered or the final cost of the renewals.