A decade ago, Orange County and the city of Orlando penned a visionary agreement that laid out in painstaking detail a blueprint for the city's future growth.

For months, city and county officials haggled over boundaries and utility issues. And when the ink dried, the arduous effort involved was readily apparent. The agreement now serves as a model for other communities throughout the state. And the county and the city had a stable foundation upon which to build for the future.

So why is Orange County now crying foul? It may not like the city's plan to study the annexation of 6,300 acres in the lucrative International Drive tourism area. But all the acreage is well within the boundaries of the 1994 agreement.

Without question, the city has a legal right to annex the property.

But to hear Orange County Chairman Rich Crotty tell it, the city's proposal amounts to a stealth land grab that will cost county taxpayers millions. Even worse, he implied that he would hold hostage county support for arena renovations and a new performing arts center if the city doesn't back off.

That's unconscionable. The two issues are wholly unrelated. But more important, creating world-class amenities in downtown Orlando benefits not only the city and the county, but the entire region.

A deal is a deal. If the county didn't think it could afford to cede to the city south International Drive and land to the east, then it shouldn't have included the area in the long-range planning agreement. The notion that county officials didn't know back then that the area would be prime for development is absurd. The massive Orange County Convention Center ensured as much.

County officials, though, say the county can't afford to lose roughly $10 million in taxes the area now pays for police and fire protection. That's because the commercial tax base on I-Drive underwrites the more costly delivery of services in residential parts of the county.

But that's the whole point of having a planning agreement. The county had a decade to mitigate that potential impact. Plus, the county still would collect plenty of taxes on the property. It just wouldn't receive taxes for police and fire services that it no longer provides.

The county, though, says it already has eight fire stations in the area, compared with the city's one. What better argument, then, for the city and the county to begin serious talks about consolidating fire services -- as voters overwhelmingly directed in the most recent election.

Other issues should be more fully explored, as well. The city's plans, for example, were the result of a request by developer Marc Watson to annex into the city about 1,800 acres he owns near the convention center. But the area under consideration by the city extends far beyond Mr. Watson's property line. And some landowners don't share his city-centric view.

At the very least, Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer owes those taxpayers an opportunity to be heard. The wishes of a single property owner shouldn't determine the fate of dozens of others.

Mr. Watson's property, which he plans to develop into an eco-friendly attraction called "Orlando Glades," also is included in a special county taxing district. So even if the city annexes the land, the county will continue to receive the additional property-tax revenue that accrues once it's developed. How that money could benefit both the city and the county also should be discussed.

Mr. Dyer and Mr. Crotty, in particular, need to ratchet down their rhetoric. Neither the city nor the county will prosper without mutual support. And that's where the region's real future lies.