Dear Editor,

Your recent article, “California communities can reduce wildfire damage by half. Here’s how,” is a powerful reminder that we already have the tools to protect our homes and neighborhoods from wildfire devastation. The UC Berkeley-led study makes it clear: home hardening and defensible space work. But knowing what works is only half the battle.

What’s often overlooked in the conversation is the cost and who is responsible for it. Upgrading infrastructure for wildfire resilience — such as retrofitting homes with fire-resistant materials and enhancing community-wide evacuation routes and water systems — requires significant investment. For many homeowners, particularly those in rural or lower-income areas, these costs can be prohibitive. Additionally, local governments may find the scale of investment needed to protect entire communities overwhelming.

We need a significant change in how the state of California distributes its wildfire mitigation funds. The majority of our state's budget is allocated yearly to fuel reduction projects, which are often located in remote wildlands.  These projects do little to safeguard homes when fires approach populated areas. It's time to redirect those funds toward assisting homeowners and community leaders in implementing proven strategies — backed by science — right where the risk is highest.

We need grants, subsidies, and technical support for residents trying to harden their homes. We need funding for local governments to upgrade infrastructure and coordinate neighborhood-wide defensible space. And we need to treat wildfire resilience not as an individual burden, but as a shared responsibility.

Thank you for elevating this issue. With smart investments and community-driven action, we can turn the tide on wildfire destruction.

Jennifer Normoyle lives in Hillsborough, California.