Rural residents who live near International Falls, Minn., currently are required to pay $25 per year for fire protection services. For one resident, not paying the $25 fee was the difference between saving part of his house and watching it burn to the ground, according to an Oct. 6 article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune.

Carl Berg, who is unemployed, survives mostly on food stamps and lived in a mobile home, couldn’t afford the fee. Of the 1,700 rural property owners near the city, 300 didn’t pay it.

When a fire started in Berg’s home on Sept. 15, the fire department only poured enough water on his trailer to temporarily put out the blaze and make sure everyone was safe. Then it left. When firefighters were called back to scene because the fire had restarted, they let the blaze destroy what was left of the structure.

What’s disturbing is that a man already fighting for survival was forced to watch his house burn down – all because he didn’t pay $25. In cases of emergency, such as fire, rural agencies must do their job first and take care of paperwork later.

It is understandable that rural fire protection agencies, such as the one in International Falls, often have a difficult time making ends meet. But rural residents still should have to pay something for emergency services.

If the area insists on keeping a fee for the service system, perhaps it would behoove it to assess major fines when it puts out fires for people who didn’t pay the $25.

The second option would be to impose a rural tax levy. In the case of International Falls, residents would be assessed about $100 in taxes. While this is a major increase, it also would help lower taxes for those living in the city. Those living outside the city limits should not be exempt from paying for life-saving services.

While tax levies do have disadvantages, such as giving better services to those in a higher tax bracket, they are at least a step in the right direction toward making sure all residents are protected and covered by emergency services.