Open fields and streams

To The editor: If you love the semi-rural quality of Warwick Valley, the Nov. 7 vote in favor of a transfer tax on new home buyers, in order to preserve open space, seems a no-brainer. That’s why the opposition to the transfer tax, mainly from builders and realtors, seems odd. They argue that preserving open space is good, but it should be funded by a general tax increase - yet they know that would be far harder, if not impossible, to pass in the highly taxed Warwick community. I know wonderful builders and realtors in Warwick who will vote yes for the three quarters of one percent tax on new home buyers because they see the resulting Community Preservation Fund as a plus for everyone. (After all, development on non-preserved land will continue as normal.) But others see Warwick’s open fields mainly as a potential income stream. For them, the Community Preservation Fund surely poses a conflict of interest? After all, the open space that’s preserved will remove hundreds of subdivision plots that would otherwise have been developed and sold. Perhaps their opposition is not so odd, after all. Cheetah Haysom Pine Island