Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously set its position in favour of a framework agreement with WSP Canada inc. for professional services on building-envelope renovation projects. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting. City staff say the agreement aims to provide commissioning and energy-efficiency services for projects managed by the city’s property-management service.
- The proposed agreement would run for 60 months, with two options to extend it by 12 months each.
- WSP would provide studies and advice, check plans, inspect and test work, and support the city through construction and warranty periods.
- The maximum amount is $1,571,064.39, plus $314,212.88 for contingencies, for a total of $1,885,277.27, taxes included.
- The city would require an evaluation of WSP’s performance. Costs would be charged to city services, boroughs and linked municipalities according to project allocation and as needs arise.
What it means for you#
- City services, boroughs and linked municipalities: Their budgets would cover orders under the agreement according to how property projects are allocated. Each purchase order still needs credit approval.
- Residents and businesses: The decision does not directly change taxes, fees, building rules or access to city services. The agreement is limited to projects carried out by the city’s property-management service.
- People using city buildings: WSP’s work could include inspections and tests of building envelopes, but the materials do not identify which buildings or projects will receive services.
Money#
The maximum agreement amount is $1,885,277.27, taxes included; the materials give no forecast of actual spending.
- This total includes $314,212.88 for contingencies. Services are paid at hourly rates.
- The decision summary says each purchase order must receive credit approval; it does not set aside the full amount in advance.
- Five firms submitted bids. WSP was selected after evaluation; two bids were non-compliant, and three firms passed the threshold for price evaluation. The materials do not say WSP was the lowest compliant bid.
What is unclear#
- Which projects will use the agreement, how many hours they will require, and how much the city will ultimately spend.
- Whether either extension option will be used.
- What results the city will use to assess WSP’s performance.
Case for#
- City staff say the city lacks professionals to commission building envelopes during renovation work. The agreement would provide those services.
- Staff say a standing agreement could avoid separate tenders and negotiations for each project, reduce delays and allow savings from volume.
- WSP’s total bid was 18.44% below the city’s estimate, according to the decision summary.
Case against#
- The full amount is a maximum, not a forecast. Actual spending depends on project needs and approved purchase orders.
- The agreement includes a contingency budget, but the materials do not explain what kinds of unforeseen costs would draw on it.
- The decision does not identify the projects or expected results, making it hard to judge how much value the services will deliver.