Summary#
Montréal city council approved a 36-month framework agreement with Metal Pole-lite inc. to supply structural materials for traffic lights when the City orders them. The agreement is worth up to $2,892,311.10, taxes included. City staff say the goal is to support traffic-light maintenance and improvement work.
- The agreement covers poles, arms, pole extensions and caps. It starts when signed; the City’s schedule lists supply from May 2026 to May 2029.
- The City may order supplies as needed. Council also required an evaluation of the supplier’s performance.
- The public call for tenders received one bid, from Metal Pole-lite, and it was compliant. It was 11% below the City’s latest estimate.
What it means for you#
- City services and boroughs: They can obtain the listed materials through the City’s supply arrangements for traffic-light maintenance and projects. Purchases are to be charged to central-service and borough budgets as needs arise.
- Residents and road users: The decision does not change traffic rules or create a new service. City staff say the supplies will support traffic-light work, including safety and mobility projects; the decision does not guarantee particular upgrades or results.
Money#
The agreement sets a maximum of $2,892,311.10, taxes included; actual spending depends on orders placed.
- The City approved the maximum amount, with purchases charged to central-service and borough budgets as needed. The decision summary says the agreement has no budget allocation in advance.
- The supplier’s bid was $354,582.90, or 11%, below the City’s estimate of $3,246,894.
- Late delivery carries a penalty of $1,000 per day for each order, capped at 3% of the total contract amount.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not state a minimum purchase amount or how much the City expects to order in practice.
- The agreement lasts 36 months from signing, but the exact signing date is not given.
- The materials do not say how the required performance evaluation will be conducted or what consequences it may have.
Case for#
- City staff say a framework agreement can make supplies more stable and simpler to obtain than buying case by case or through installation contractors.
- The bid was compliant and below the City’s estimate. The materials say the supplied products also passed a technical conformity check.
Case against#
- Only one bid was received, although five firms obtained the tender documents. That gives the City less competition to compare than if it had received several bids.
- The maximum amount is approved, but the materials do not give expected actual spending or a minimum level of purchases.