Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously adopted a position to join the Centre d'acquisitions gouvernementales’ (CAG) group purchase for cellular mobility goods and services. It asks the agglomeration council to approve a 60-month framework agreement, retroactive from March 2, 2026, to March 1, 2031, with a maximum amount of $16,800,000, taxes included. City staff say the goal is to maintain cellular services and obtain competitive prices; the agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting.
- The agreement covers cellular plans, phones and accessories. Specialized services such as telemetry and surveillance cameras are excluded.
- The CAG selected two compliant providers under its call for tenders. The lowest-priced provider is ranked first; for the first two years, orders go to that provider by default. The second-ranked provider can supply services when a derogation is requested.
- The agreement includes a 12-month migration period and price and discount reviews scheduled for March 2, 2028, and March 2, 2029. Those reviews could change the providers’ ranking.
- The resolution authorizes a city technology-services director to sign related documents and charges spending to the budgets of the administrative units that use the services, as needs arise.
What it means for you#
- City departments and staff: The city would continue buying cellular plans, devices and related services through the CAG group purchase. City staff reported 14,500 cellular subscriptions in August 2023; that is not a current count or a guaranteed number of subscriptions under this agreement.
- Residents: The decision does not directly change residents’ cellular service, taxes or eligibility for a city service.
Money#
The agreement has a maximum amount of $16,800,000, taxes included; the materials do not give a forecast of actual spending.
- Spending is to come from the operating budgets of the units using the services, based on their needs. The decision summary says spending could also affect the agglomeration budget.
- City staff say plan prices are lower than under the previous agreement and that device discounts from the first-ranked provider range from 5% to 50%, depending on manufacturer and model. These are staff’s reported comparisons, not guaranteed savings.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not name the two providers or say how many bids were submitted.
- The maximum amount is stated, but the expected spending and how it compares with the previous agreement are not provided.
- The decision does not say how the city will request a derogation to use the second-ranked provider.
Case for#
- City staff say the agreement would help maintain service while the city moves to a new provider and platform.
- The CAG’s group purchase covers plans and devices, and scheduled price reviews could change provider rankings.
- The city can place orders as needs arise rather than committing to a stated number of subscriptions.
Case against#
- The $16.8-million ceiling is substantial, while the materials do not give an actual spending forecast or current subscription count.
- The decision relies on a default provider for the first two years, but does not explain the process for requesting a derogation to use the second-ranked provider.
- The agreement excludes some specialized cellular-related services, which the city plans to address separately; the cost and terms of that separate procurement are not provided.