SOUTH PORTLAND – A small cadre of residents delivered harsh criticism to the South Portland City Council Monday night for considering a $5 million office building for a new City Hall.

“Why the rush?” asked resident Greg Lewis of Mussey Street. “That building is just sitting there empty.”

At issue is a 32,000-square-foot building at 100 Waterman Drive that has remained vacant since it was built in 2008. Developer Andrew Ingalls has repeatedly offered to sell the building to city leaders, noting that it is more energy efficient than the small, aging facility the city uses on Cottage Road.

Although Ingalls is offering the building at $4.8 million, city officials estimate that the total purchase would top $5 million, once the facility is outfitted and workers moved.

Councilor Linda Boudreau, with support from Councilor Maxine Beecher, is pushing for the council to seriously consider the purchase. The building is four stories and has views of the Fore River and Portland Harbor.

“I know that people are saying that ‘Linda is absolutely crazy’ and that ‘Thank God, she will be gone soon,’ said Boudreau, referring to her term, which expires in December. Boudreau will not run again because of term limits.

“But it is my job to make sure that this city does not turn its back on an opportunity,” Boudreau said at Monday night’s council meeting. “It doesn’t mean we have to go forward. But it does mean we have to discuss it thoroughly.”

The same lack of study and public discussion that led the city to spend more than $600,000 to buy the Armory building four years ago as a potential City Hall could cause the city to forgo the chance to invest in 100 Waterman Drive, she said. The city subsequently determined that the Armory would be unsuitable for city offices, and the large structure has sat vacant.

“I beg the public and council to be patient,” she said.

At Boudreau’s urging the council toured the new office building last week and discussed the possibility of purchasing the property during a workshop Monday night that preceded the council meeting. Beecher said the building could be “a steal,” and Mayor Tom Coward said the purchase could allow the city to consolidate all offices under one roof.

No vote was taken Monday night, though it became clear that the council was divided on the issue. The council decided to have a future workshop to explore all options for City Hall.

There was no discussion of financing, though City Manager Jim Gailey indicated that there may be some funds available through the sale of city property.

But the residents who spoke out seemed uniform in their opposition. Most questioned the timing and need.

Monday morning, South Portland residents who use Facebook were invited to virtually sign a petition to oppose spending $4.8 million to move city offices to 100 Waterman Drive. The Facebook page implored residents to speak out against the purchase.

The message on the virtual petition stated: “We must act now to tell them that we will not accept this expenditure, or at the very least, not without public input or a public vote. It is OUR money they are spending and we deserve a say in how it is spent!”

Eighteen residents had “signed” the petition prior to the City Council workshop and meeting Monday.

They included former Councilor David Jacobs, former city attorney Mary Kahl, attorney Dan Mooers, author Hannah Holmes and Planning Board member Don Russell.

“City Hall is in poor condition and also not well laid out for its purposes,” Kahl said in an interview. “But I agree that the city has a number of higher priorities,” she said, noting that the schools and public works buildings also need improvements.

She also noted that the city had to lay off staff a year ago to close a budget gap. Keeping current staff employed should be a higher priority, she said.

Radio host Chuck Igo, a South Portland resident, said he at first supported the idea of exploring 100 Waterman Drive for a city hall. But now he said that he thinks it is “too much building” for the city’s needs.

“It seems to me that the cost far exceeds the realistic needs of the city,” he said. “The current City Hall is old, but appears to be well-maintained,” said Igo, noting that he probably visits there at least six to 10 times per year.

Monday night, concerns and questions continued to be raised. Albert DiMillo Jr. of Colchester Drive said he has yet to see an engineering report outlining deficiencies in the existing City Hall.

“Is there structural damage? Is there asbestos leaking? Are people getting sick?” he asked. “There are limited dollars and you need to spend money on what is really needed.”

Gary Crosby urged city leaders to seek the expertise of professionals with a background in commercial real estate. He said the city needs to look at costs per square foot to figure out whether it really will be getting a bargain, as some councilors seem to believe.

Crosby noted that moving into Mahoney Middle School would be more cost effective, if the 60,000-square-foot building becomes available. Even with an estimated $8 million in renovations, the city “would get more bang for its buck,” he said.

The future of Mahoney Middle School, which is on Ocean Street, is uncertain as school leaders explore the costs of consolidating the two middle schools – Mahoney and Memorial – at the Memorial building site.

City officials acknowledge that there are competing building needs in South Portland that include renovations proposed for South Portland High School, the two middle schools, the public works complex and the main library. All the residents who spoke at the council meeting Monday argued that investing in a new city hall should be low on the priority list.

Councilor Tom Blake said he feels that Mahoney might be suitable for future space for a city hall and a second community center. He has said he cannot support the move to 100 Waterman Drive when the current City Hall is functional.

Councilor Rosemarie de Angelis seemed to agree. She said that there are too many variables right now for the city to purchase office space at 100 Waterman Drive. At the same time, she described City Hall in “desperate need” of renovations, without citing specific problems.

But Boudreau and Beecher spoke in support of considering the purchase, arguing the down economy presents investment opportunities for the city.

Boudreau pointed out that the existing City Hall needs a new furnace and is too small to accommodate the engineering department, which may be moved into the former Hamlin School, a building the city owns.

Some city leaders have argued that now is the time to invest in a new building for City Hall because real estate prices are at historic lows. But de Angelis said that if 100 Waterman Drive is such a bargain, “then it should sell easily. That does not mean the city needs to be the buyer.”

The City Council took no action before recessing after 9 p.m. to go into executive session to discuss a possible lease on the Armory building, which it purchased four years ago. Although there was momentum at the time to turn the warehouse-like structure into a City Hall, leaders have admitted repairs and traffic posed costly challenges.

The city is currently in negotiations to lease the building to a group of unidentified investors supporting a plan by Eric Matheson of Cape Elizabeth to convert part of the building into a sound stage and production studio. The rest of the building would be updated and leased to similar businesses in the entertainment production industry.

Sources close to the council said Monday that city leaders were considering a five-year lease, with an option to buy, similar to the contract it developed with Mad Horse Theatre to lease space at the former Hutchins School. Reached at home, Matheson said that the city was completing the lease agreement, which it would send to him and his representatives to review. He said he was optimistic about the deal.

Many residents have criticized the city’s decision to purchase the Armory with little public oversight. Most of the negotiations were done in executive session. The city had moved swiftly to buy the building, because some private investors, including a children’s theater, were considering purchasing it at the time. With the depressed real estate market, city officials have acknowledged that they likely could not sell the building today for the price at which they purchased it.