Summary#
Montréal City Council unanimously adopted its position on extending the Ecocentre Saint-Laurent container and transport contract held by GFL Environmental inc. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting. City staff say the goal is to keep waste transport running without interruption.
- The position is to exercise the contract’s second 12-month extension, to October 31, 2027, or until its funds run out.
- It would authorize an additional $934,221.31, taxes included: $708,011.60 for services, $10,620.17 for price adjustment, and $107,794.77 each for contingencies and changes in quantities.
- The added amount would raise the contract total from $2,238,838.76 to $3,173,060.07, taxes included. GFL took over the contract from Excavations Vidolo ltée in 2025.
What it means for you#
- Ecocentre users: The contract covers supplying containers and transporting waste from Ecocentre Saint-Laurent. It supports continued service there; it does not change who may use the ecocentre.
- Agglomeration taxpayers: The agglomeration of Montréal would pay the added cost from its operating budget.
- GFL Environmental inc.: The company would continue providing the contract services during the extension, including supplying trucks, staff and containers, and collecting, weighing and transporting materials.
Money#
The proposed additional spending is $934,221.31, taxes included, over the 2026 and 2027 financial years.
- The contract’s prices will be adjusted once, on January 1, 2027, based on the Montréal consumer price index.
- The amount includes budgets for contingencies and changes in quantities; the materials do not say how much of those budgets will ultimately be spent.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not give the actual number of trips or total cost expected during the extension; they estimate about 2,700 trips a year.
- The original contract followed a public call for tenders with two bids. The materials do not say whether GFL’s original bid was the lowest compliant bid.
Case for#
- City staff say the extension would keep container transport going and avoid a possible service stoppage.
- Staff say prices are competitive and GFL’s service quality is satisfactory.
- The extension uses an option already included in the contract, rather than ending it early and arranging another contract.
Case against#
- The added spending is substantial, and the first extension’s contingency and quantity-change budgets were fully used.
- Staff attribute the extra need to increased ecocentre use and more waste, but the materials do not show how that demand or spending may change during the extension.