What we see is the outcome of a political process, but doesn’t mean policymakers are unaware.

All it really means is that when it comes to a battle between fire prevention people and people who like their gardens, in the absence of a fire, the people worried about fire are going to look like scolds and the people who want the individual freedom to have a garden are going to win the political fight. More of a collective outcome of our society than oversight by policymakers.

Good luck trying to ban gardens in the Oakland hills, people just won’t do it even if policymakers want it. Probably the best way to do it would be to deregulate insurance and give them discretion - “oh you want to have a garden in a fire prone area, sure - that will just be 3x your original bill”