The saga began last week as about a dozen people sat in the lobby of Arundel Center in Annapolis, holding vigil after the council voted down an amendment they needed for a land deal.

Two 80-year-old Samaras women, matriarchs of a longtime Annapolis family, sat amid developers who were trying to change the zoning on their property off Bay Ridge Road and leaders of community groups who agreed to help them.

The residents along the Annapolis Neck Peninsula had sparred with developers for a decade, but the community's leaders embraced the Samaras plan because the owners conceded environmental safeguards, granted some control over the tenants and promised not to build homes.

The night before the vigil, on May 22, four council members voted against the proposal to grant commercial zoning to the 6 acres of land.

The group in the Arundel Center lobby spent the next day trying to understand why a proposal backed by representatives of 20,000 residents would be rejected.

County Councilman Josh Cohen, who represents the area, had introduced the zoning change to the council. He was "blindsided" when they voted it down.

After a day of questioning his colleagues and making phone calls, Mr. Cohen, D-Annapolis, emerged into the lobby and presented the group with a solution.

According to four of the people there, the deal was this: The vote would go their way if they agreed to drop opposition to developer Karen Connolley's project next door to the Samaras property. That opposition has stalled a drug store and senior housing complex for five years.

"I'm just a citizen here, but to me that was the kind of horse trading you do in a smoke-filled room," Annapolis Roads resident Anastasia Hopkinson said. "You don't do it in the hallway of the Arundel Center. … This can't be the way the council works. It was like J.R. in Dallas."

Several attempts yesterday by The Capital to contact Ms. Connolley were unsuccessful.

The residents turned down the offer.

But as tomorrow's final vote on the topic nears, they pled with County Executive John R. Leopold to intervene. He said no.

They also are asking councilmembers to vote down the entire zoning bill that regulates land use on the peninsula so the Samaras plan can be resurrected.

The four on the council who voted against the plan - Republicans Ron Dillon, Ed Middlebrooks and Cathy Vitale and Democrat Daryl Jones - say accusations that Ms. Connolley swayed them are unfounded.

Approving it would be an "anomaly," said Council Chairman Dillon, who voted with the others for another plan to accommodate stores on the front of the Samaras land and homes on the back. "At the time, I thought it was the best scenario for the residents," he said.

The councilmen also said residents and the Samaras family quietly negotiated their deal for four months, and signed it hours before the council's first vote, even though the topic of changing zoning rules on the peninsula had been before the council since April.

"They do this deal and think we're supposed to rubber stamp it. They're sore losers," Mr. Middlebrooks said. "It would be nice if they didn't make backroom deals."

Mr. Middlebrooks said if Ms. Connolley called and told him she supported the Samaras plan, he would have voted for it. But he sees the plan as inherently inequitable to surrounding property owners who have fought with the residents and must adhere to the city's building moratorium.

While the properties sit side-by-side, one is in the county and one in the city.

"It would effectively kill her (Ms. Connolley) property and that was unfair," Mr. Middlebrooks said. "I'm representing everybody."

History

For years, properties had seeped into the city, where rules allow denser construction and higher profits for developers.

Residents organized into the Annapolis Neck Peninsula Federation, which represents 36 communities and approximately 20,000 residents. They have historically opposed development and the denser traffic it brings.

They fought the Samaras property, which is owned by the Samaras family and a development company called AMR Commercial, when it was a candidate to be annexed into city limits last year.

Eventually, both sides agreed to a convenience-oriented project with more trees than the county requires, stricter rules on stormwater runoff and a citizen panel that could help pick the stores the residents wanted.

The residents agreed because they thought a commercial project would bring fewer cars than new homes, and they could pick stores that would keep residents from clogging roads by driving off the peninsula to shop.

"I thought it was strange the people who support this (now) were the same people who have fussed with the city over its development," Annapolis Mayor Ellen O. Moyer said.

She describes the accusation that Ms. Connolley manipulated the vote as a "smoke screen" disguising the fact that the Samaras plan may not be a great idea.

Ms. Connolley is a member of Bay Village LLC, a company that owns the hunk of land beside the Samaras property. The Mexican Cafe currently sits on Bay Village land.

Resident opposition delayed her group's plan to put a drug store, a small office building, a relocated Mexican Cafe and 112 condos for seniors, said Alan J. Hyatt, an Annapolis attorney who represents the group.

Mr. Hyatt said residents had not offered to negotiate a deal like the Samaras plan with Bay Village developers.

"The only thing I hear is they object to everything on that site," Mr. Hyatt said.

Permitting the Samaras plan to more forward before Bay Village means the projects would compete for tenants and grant Samaras an advantage.

"It's unfortunate the way it all played out," Mr. Cohen said.