Summary#
Montréal city council adopted a decision awarding 9519-4668 Québec inc. (Remorquage Gladiateur) a contract for towing during snow-removal operations in Montréal-Nord. The contract covers three winter seasons, with an option for the City to extend it by one season. City staff say the goal is to support effective and safe snow removal.
- The contract is for $502,900.65, taxes included.
- Council also authorized $100,580.13 for contingencies and $75,435.10 for changes in the amount of work, bringing the authorized total to $678,915.88, taxes included.
- The City may choose whether to extend the contract; the decision summary says it can make that choice at its sole discretion.
- The City must evaluate Remorquage Gladiateur’s performance.
What it means for you#
- Montréal-Nord residents: The contractor will provide towing services for the City’s snow-removal operations. The decision summary says services will be provided from November 15 to March 31 in each winter season.
- Vehicle owners: The decision funds towing linked to snow removal, but does not itself set new parking rules, fees, or procedures for notifying owners.
- City administration: The City’s Service de la concertation des arrondissements et de l’expérience citoyenne handles planning and contracting for this work, according to the decision summary.
Money#
The City authorized spending of up to $678,915.88, taxes included.
- The contract price is $502,900.65; the rest is for contingencies and changes in quantities.
- The call for tenders received eight bids overall. Three bids were submitted for this Montréal-Nord lot; the City awarded it to the lowest compliant bidder.
- City staff estimated the total at $796,594.64, taxes included. The awarded total is about 15% below that estimate.
What is unclear#
- The decision materials do not set out the detailed service standards or how performance will be assessed.
- They do not give the price or other terms that would apply if the City uses the one-season extension.
- One of the three bidders for this lot was not considered for the award because its stated capacity had been used for other contracts.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the decision is that the City needs a contractor to provide towing support for snow removal and lacks the resources to do this work itself, according to city staff.
- The chosen bid was below the City’s estimate and was the lowest compliant bid for the lot.
Case against#
- One concern is that the total authorized amount is substantially higher than the base contract price because it includes contingencies and possible changes in quantities.
- Competition for this lot was limited: only two of the three submitted bids were considered for the award, and the second-lowest compliant bid was 32% higher than the winning bid.