Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously adopted a position in favour of extending TELECON inc.’s telecommunications cabling contract for two 12-month periods and increasing its maximum value. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting. City staff say the extensions are intended to maintain and improve connectivity for municipal services.
- The proposed extensions cover August 24, 2026, to August 23, 2028.
- The proposed additional spending is $4,118,128.81, taxes included: $3,022,336.04 for contract work and $1,095,792.77 for contingencies.
- If approved, the contract’s maximum total would rise from $4,282,949.11 to $8,401,077.92, taxes included.
- The contract covers cabling materials and work, including network cables, network outlets, Wi-Fi access points, and checking or repairing faulty outlets.
- The original contract was awarded after a public call for tenders that received five bids. The materials do not say whether TELECON’s bid was the lowest compliant bid.
What it means for you#
- Municipal services and staff: If the agglomeration council approves the extensions, the City could order cabling work and materials for municipal buildings under the contract. City staff say this is meant to support connectivity for municipal operations and services.
- Residents: The decision does not directly create a new public service or change residents’ rights, fees, or access to services.
- Taxpayers: The proposed contract maximum would increase, but the framework agreement does not allocate the full amount upfront. Spending would be approved through purchase orders for identified needs.
Money#
The proposed additional spending is $4,118,128.81, taxes included; the proposed contract maximum would be $8,401,077.92, taxes included.
- The contingency portion is $1,095,792.77, taxes included.
- City staff say purchase orders would be paid from budgets already assigned to projects or operating needs, including the City’s capital investment program or the IT service’s operating budget. The expenses could include agglomeration expenses.
- The materials give no estimate of how much of the maximum amount will actually be spent.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not say what work or purchases are already expected, or how much of the authorized maximum is likely to be used.
- They do not explain how the contingency amount would be approved or what would qualify for its use.
- The materials do not say whether the City considered a new call for tenders for the extension period.
Case for#
- City staff say the contract supports telecommunications connections across more than 500 buildings used by municipal services.
- Staff say extending the contract would help maintain service continuity and meet additional cabling needs linked to office reconfigurations.
- The two extensions would keep access to the supplier and equipment in place for up to two years, which staff say could reduce supply delays and help plan projects.
Case against#
- The proposed maximum increase is substantial, and the materials do not show how much of it is based on identified work rather than future or contingent needs.
- The materials do not explain why extending the existing contract is preferable to seeking new bids for the two-year period.