Summary#
On April 20, 2026, Montréal city council unanimously adopted a recommendation to the agglomeration council about a new version of the assistance program for businesses affected by major construction. It recommended adopting the amended bylaw and setting aside an additional $26 million, bringing the program budget to $27.8 million. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting; this city council decision does not itself put the new program into effect.
- City staff describe the planned change as combining the existing financial-aid program (RCG 18-043) and the flat-grant program (RCG 23-013) into one program.
- Staff say the new program would keep the existing aid amounts: a $5,000 flat grant and financial aid based on a gross-profit loss greater than 5%, with aid capped at $40,000. The summary does not clarify whether a business could receive both.
- Staff say the new program would include qualifying construction projects lasting more than three months, including successive or simultaneous projects in one area; the previous rule covered projects lasting more than six months.
- The program would cover work by Montréal, linked municipalities and the Société de transport de Montréal (STM). The executive committee would designate eligible areas and work periods.
- Staff say the program would continue until 2033, and the first payment could be made in instalments before all financial documents are provided.
What it means for you#
- Businesses in affected areas: If the agglomeration council adopts the bylaw, eligible businesses could seek aid under the combined program. Staff describe earlier payments and broader coverage of construction periods, but the supplied resolution does not set out the detailed eligibility rules.
- Taxpayers: The recommendation would add $26 million to the program budget, bringing it to $27.8 million.
- City administration: Staff say the program would use a partly automated online application process and combine the two existing programs. The executive committee would have powers to designate areas and work dates, and to change several program details.
Money#
The city council recommended an additional $26 million for a total program budget of $27.8 million.
- City staff estimate the program needs $26.3 million. The supplied material does not explain how that estimate relates to the recommended $27.8 million total.
- Staff say earlier aid included a $5,000 flat grant and financial aid of up to $40,000. They say the new program would maintain those limits.
- No publicly available information on the program’s expected yearly payments or administrative costs is in the supplied material.
What is unclear#
- The amended bylaw text is not supplied, so the exact changes made by the council are not available here.
- The resolution is a recommendation, not the agglomeration council’s final decision on the bylaw or funding.
- The summary does not fully explain how businesses qualify, how aid is calculated and paid, or whether a business can receive both forms of aid.
- The summary says the executive committee could change aid amounts, required documents, the loss threshold and the program end date. It does not explain what limits or review process would apply to those decisions.
- No publicly available information on when the new rules would start is in the supplied material.
Case for#
- City staff say the existing programs have had long processing and payment delays and have not adequately accounted for successive or overlapping construction projects.
- Combining the programs, allowing earlier instalments and covering projects lasting more than three months could make support available sooner and to more businesses affected by construction.
- Staff say the proposed program would simplify applications and improve the city’s handling of claims.
Case against#
- The supplied material does not show the amended bylaw’s exact rules, making it hard to assess who would qualify or how payments would be decided.
- The executive committee could change important program terms, including aid amounts, eligibility thresholds and required documents. The summary does not describe safeguards for those powers.
- The stated $26.3 million need and the recommended $27.8 million total budget are different figures; the materials do not explain the difference.