Summary#
Montréal city council adopted a decision to extend five snow-clearing contracts by 12 months, for the 2026–27 winter season. The contracts are with Déneigement Fontaine Gadbois inc., J.M. Gagné inc., Déneigement Cyrbault inc. and Pavages d’Amour inc. The decision’s stated goal is to continue turnkey snow-clearing services in Anjou, Montréal-Nord and Pierrefonds-Roxboro.
- The city authorized an additional $7,399,240.83, taxes included, bringing the contracts’ stated combined total to $26,664,219.58, taxes included.
- The additional amount includes $5,480,919.13 for the contracts, $1,096,183.83 for contingencies and $822,137.87 for changes in quantities.
- The contracts were originally awarded through public calls for tenders: the 2022 tender received 11 bids and the 2024 tender received 9. The materials do not say whether these firms submitted the lowest compliant bids.
- City staff say the extension is at the city’s discretion. The contracts are scheduled to start May 18, 2026.
What it means for you#
- Residents of Anjou, Montréal-Nord and Pierrefonds-Roxboro: the city will continue using these contractors for turnkey snow clearing for another winter. The decision does not describe changes to the services residents receive.
- Taxpayers: the expenditure is paid entirely by the city centre, not charged directly to the three boroughs under this decision.
Money#
The decision authorizes $7,399,240.83, taxes included; the materials do not give a separate estimate of the final amount spent.
- City staff say funds are in the service’s budget, but extra credits may be needed if snowfall exceeds budget assumptions. A separate decision would be brought forward to use the snow reserve.
- The decision includes contingency and quantity-change allowances. City staff say the contracts were increased by 35% for these items, to account for winter uncertainty.
What is unclear#
- The detailed amounts do not add up exactly: the five contract amounts in the resolution add to $5,480,919.14, one cent more than the authorized contract amount. The five all-in amounts in the staff summary add to $7,399,240.84, also one cent above the authorized total.
- The materials do not say whether the renewed contracts were the lowest compliant bids, or compare their prices with bids for new contracts.
- The actual cost will depend in part on snowfall and any changes in quantities.
Case for#
- City staff recommend the extensions with the three boroughs’ agreement. They cite contractor performance, cost, the timing of contracts ending, and the need to reconsider how snow-clearing areas are divided.
- Staff say refusing the extensions would require a new call for tenders for the coming winter. Extending the contracts provides continuity for that season.
Case against#
- The extension keeps the same firms for another season without a new tender. The materials do not show how their prices compare with current bids.
- The authorized amount includes substantial allowances for contingencies and quantity changes, while the final spending is uncertain.