The City of South Portland’s purchase of the Armory building at the foot of the Casco Bay Bridge has been controversial since word that the city council was considering it in January.
    Having outmaneuvered representatives of the Children’s Theater of Maine to gain possession of the landmark building abutting the city’s public safety facilities nearly six months ago, the city has yet to answer some fundamental questions about the city’s newest property. Those questions include: what is the condition of the building? Will the city renovate it? If so, how much will it cost? To what degree will it be renovated and to what end? If the city is not going to renovate it, what is to happen to it? Will it be demolished? Will it be sold?
    With these questions in mind it was interesting to hear the city council debate whether to award a $17,000 no-bid contract to refurbish the building’s front steps at its Sept. 6 meeting.
    In arguing the case to award the job, acting City Manager Jim Gailey and Councilor Kay Loring told the council why it was important the work be done and done sooner rather than later. The contractor was one of two informally approached about the work and his bid was significantly lower than the other, Gailey said. The council was told the contractor had a soft spot for the old building, but he had a very small window of opportunity between other contracts. If the city didn’t act, it would need to wait until next spring at the earliest for the steps to the vacant building to be fixed.
    A majority of councilors apparently agreed at first and when Councilor Ralph Baxter wondered why it couldn’t wait, his motion to table the bid was soundly defeated.
    Only after questions arose about whether the renovations to the front steps met historical preservation standards did the council lose its enthusiasm for fast-tracking the work.
    “We are getting to the point where we have more questions than answers,” Councilor Jim Hughes said.
    More questions than answers indeed.
    Gailey informed the council if the Armory’s renovations would become the subject of a future council workshop, he would like to put together a complete list of all the buildings needs and that would take some time.
    It sounds like that would be a responsible investment of time and effort before any more money is spent on the building.
    City staff and elected officials have been widely criticized for purchasing the Armory. It is unclear at this point whether that criticism is deserved or not. Those who supported the purchase may yet be vindicated, but they are not there yet. Why invite more criticism by rushing through cosmetic improvements when a full accounting of the buildings needs and the costs associated with those needs has yet to be completed? What will people say if the next bid request associated with the building is to hire a wrecking ball?
    If the council is eager to spend $17,000 on improving a city building, it is our understanding that the current City Hall has a few needs itself. Conveniently, those needs are known. Perhaps the priority of the city should be fixing those building that are being used by the city’s resident’s and employees and not on a building that might be used by someone, someday in some capacity.
–Ward Peck