Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously adopted a position in favour of using the first 12-month extension of its framework agreement with Levio Conseils inc. for specialized IT project-management services. The city is asking the agglomeration council to approve an additional $2,594,119.99, taxes included, bringing the agreement total to $5,121,270.49, taxes included. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting.
- The extension would keep Levio’s services available for another 12 months; purchases would be made as needs arise.
- The original agreement was awarded through a public call for tenders that received 12 bids. The materials do not say whether Levio’s bid was the lowest compliant bid.
- City staff say the services would support IT projects, add targeted expertise and help transfer knowledge to city IT teams.
What it means for you#
- Residents: No direct change to residents’ rights, services or fees is set out. City staff say the work is intended to support digital projects and services.
- City IT staff: Levio could continue providing project-management services as needs arise. The materials do not require staff to use Levio for every project.
Money#
The city’s proposed position authorizes an additional expenditure of $2,594,119.99, taxes included, for the 12-month extension.
- The original agreement was $2,527,150.50, taxes included; the extended agreement would total $5,121,270.49, taxes included.
- The extension amount is indexed to the consumer price index at 2.65%.
- The spending would come from the IT Service’s capital program budget, as needs arise. The city says expenses may include agglomeration expenses and would be allocated under the city’s rules for mixed administrative expenses.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not say how many people or hours the extension would buy, or how the city will decide which needs to fill.
- They do not compare the extension’s cost with hiring staff or seeking new bids.
- The exact share of costs charged to the agglomeration is not stated.
Case for#
- City staff say the agreement has supported several IT projects and helped increase the capacity of internal teams.
- A possible argument for the extension is that it keeps specialized help available while the city works on planned IT projects and transfers knowledge to its own teams.
Case against#
- The extension adds more than $2.5 million in authorized spending with no stated estimate of the volume of services or number of projects it will cover.
- The materials do not explain why extending this agreement is preferable to seeking new bids or using only internal staff.