Everyone seems to like the idea of creating a Rathdrum Prairie aquifer protection district to track the quality of the region’s drinking water. But far fewer are as enthusiastic about being part of the tens of thousands of Kootenai County residents who will pay for it.

With the property tax deadline come and gone, taxpayers, particularly those on fixed incomes or with low incomes, are keenly aware that escalating housing prices are pushing their taxes higher at alarming rates. In Coeur d’Alene, taxpayers are feeling the effect of the passage of the library and public safety bonds in February and the decision by North Idaho College trustees to give significant raises to faculty and staff. They aren’t in the mood for another fee or tax.

Yet, most Kootenai County residents drink the pristine water of the great underwater river that sustains the area.

As unwelcome as a new fee is in North Idaho’s current anti-tax climate, this one may be the most important of all. An abundant source of quality drinking water is at a root of the growth and prosperity of Spokane and Kootenai counties. Spokane County has had an Aquifer Protection Area for about 20 years. Now, it’s Kootenai County’s turn to follow up on the Panhandle Health District’s successful septic abatement work by promoting the proposed aquifer district.

Under the plan promoted by Republican legislators Bob Nonini and Frank Henderson, residents above the aquifer would pay an initial fee of $8 to raise $350,000 yearly for aquifer protection. Entities such as the health district would apply to the county for the money to, among other things, monitor water quality, eliminate dry wells that pour toxic substances directly into the aquifer, and educate the public. The annual fee would eventually be raised to $24.

At a meeting Thursday with the Post Falls lawmakers, prospective fee payers raised legitimate concerns about their proposal, including:

•Many bureaucracies have been formed in the name of a good cause. What guarantees do Kootenai County water users have that a good program won’t be abused, as fees increase, to create an underground water fiefdom within, for example, the environmental division of the health district?

•The legislation proposed by Nonini and Henderson would assess everyone equally, rather than calculate the amount of property owned or water used into the fee schedule. Henderson explained that the proposal focuses on water quality, not quantity, which makes everyone an equal partner. However, it’s hard to imagine that a senior citizen living on a fixed income should be tapped for the same amount of money as a millionaire with a large, lakeside home and acreage.

•A new fee will make it that much harder for low-income seniors to survive. The legislation must include a hardship exemption.

As with most legislation, the bill for the aquifer protection district has kinks to work out. With an uncertain source of state or federal funding, however, the proposal sounds like the best way to protect a key source to the quality of life in Spokane and Kootenai counties.