Pasadena has a thing for zero. Zero Waste. Zero traffic fatalities. One hundred percent carbon-free electricity. And now “functional zero” street homelessness. Who can argue with the aspirations? We all want less waste, safer streets, cleaner energy, and fewer people living on sidewalks. But that is exactly my point: fewer is a goal. Zero is an absolute. And when zero doesn’t actually mean zero, the word begins to lose its meaning.
Pasadena’s own Zero Waste plan is a perfect example. It calls for Zero Waste by 2040, while projecting a minimum 87 percent diversion rate. That may be a worthwhile goal. But it isn’t zero. The City Council has also adopted a goal of zero traffic fatalities by 2035, and Pasadena is pursuing 100 percent carbon-free electricity by 2030. Now, we are talking about “functional zero” homelessness.
Pasadena’s own homelessness data says that even after helping more than 1,000 people exit homelessness into permanent housing over three years, the number of people entering homelessness continues to grow. So before announcing “zero,” shouldn’t we first ask what is realistically achievable?
If homeless inflow continues to outpace housing, what does functional zero actually mean, and is it achievable? What number are we trying to reach if not? By when? At what cost? And how will we know whether the policy is working? No business could survive by announcing “zero” as the goal and figuring out the math later. Yet government too often does exactly that. We wouldn’t run our households that way either. Imagine raising children around a series of absolute “zero” expectations — zero mistakes, zero bad decisions, zero problems. Real life doesn’t work that way. Real life requires judgment, priorities, tradeoffs, and measurable progress.
Our city government should work with reality, not slogans. Let’s start with a realistic goal, a clear timetable, a reasonable price tag, and regular reports showing whether we are meeting it. Let’s focus on goals we can measure and ultimately hold our government accountable for meeting them. Businesses do it, and so should our government.
An aspiration like “zero” cannot replace a well-prepared goal, and a slogan is not a measurement. I would rather Pasadena promise “fewer” and show us the progress than promise zero and later explain why zero never really meant zero in the first place. If City Hall wants to keep promising us zero everything, then residents should insist on three things in return: accountability, fiscal discipline, and no new taxes.
Define the goal. Show us the numbers. Report the progress. Tell us what it costs. And if reaching “zero” requires another tax, assessment, or revenue measure, that should be part of the conversation from the start — not a surprise at the end. Maybe the most important zero for residents is this one: Zero blank checks.
