Summary#
Montréal city council unanimously set the city’s position on a contract for ServiceNow project-management licences. The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting. City staff say the goal is to bring project, resource and budget tracking into one system.
- The proposed contract is with Les Solutions Victrix inc., through its agreement with the ministère de la Cybersécurité et du Numérique (MCN), for 30 September 2026 to 29 September 2029.
- The contract amount is a maximum of $1,493,847.18, taxes included, for licences. The resolution also authorizes $29,877 in MCN management fees and $5,000 for related costs.
- The licences would be bought as the city’s needs arise and assigned to city units based on justified needs.
- City staff say Les Solutions Victrix was the lowest compliant bidder under the MCN agreement. The materials do not give the number of bids.
What it means for you#
- City departments and staff: If the agglomeration council approves the contract, city units with justified needs could receive licences for ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management (SPM). The tool is intended for tracking project requests, work, resources, milestones and budgets.
- Residents and businesses: The decision does not directly change a public service, fee, tax or right. City staff expect the tool to support internal project management; the materials do not establish that it will improve services.
- City administration: The Service des technologies de l’information would manage the purchase and charge some licence costs back to the units that need them.
Money#
The maximum total authorized spending is $1,528,724.18, taxes included, over three years.
- $1,493,847.18 is for licences, bought as needs arise. The decision summary divides this into $738,074.49 for the IT service and $755,772.69 for additional unit needs.
- $29,877 is for MCN management fees, and $5,000 is for related costs. Both are charged to the IT service’s operating budget.
- The summary says the additional unit costs would be charged to the units concerned. It does not give a final split among units or areas of responsibility.
- City staff say the required funds are included in the relevant operating budgets. No separate cost estimate for administration or staffing is provided.
What is unclear#
- The materials do not say how many bids were received for the MCN agreement.
- Licence spending depends on demand. The actual annual cost and the number of licences to be bought are not fixed in the decision.
- The materials do not explain what checks will determine whether a unit’s need is justified.
- City staff describe expected benefits, but the materials do not set targets or a way to measure whether the system achieves them.
Case for#
- City staff say the city currently uses separate tools to track projects, resources and budgets. A shared system could make this information easier to compare and use in decisions.
- The MCN agreement offers a way to buy licences through a shared purchasing arrangement. City staff say the selected firm was the lowest compliant bidder.
- The city would buy licences as needs arise, rather than committing in the decision to a fixed number of licences.
Case against#
- The spending limit is substantial, while actual licence needs and costs may change over the three-year period.
- The decision does not set measures for checking whether the tool improves project oversight or reduces manual work.
- The city is relying on a single software platform for this function. The materials do not detail how the purchase will affect existing tools or what happens if the city’s needs change.