Municipal Services Committee Advances Hydrogen Bus Item, but Seeks Answers on Funding

The City Council’s Municipal Services Committee voted Tuesday to forward a hydrogen bus infrastructure item to the full City Council, while directing staff to answer key questions about funding, costs and alternatives amid clear pushback from committee members.

City transportation staff strongly defended the city’s plan to invest in hydrogen fuel cell buses, describing the technology as reliable, resilient and better suited for the City’s transit needs than current battery-electric options.

In August, the department received authorization from the City Council to proceed with the order of 17 hydrogen buses. The department anticipates the arrival of the buses in October.

“From the standpoint of superior range, the hydrogen fuel cell electric buses allow us to serve the same routes as renewable natural gas buses without service adjustments,” Director of Transportation Joaquin Siques said. “They provide suitability for all of our route profiles. And the current battery electric bus technology requires up to two to one replacement ratio, which means 34 buses to replace our existing 17 buses. And what we’ve identified as part of the hydrogen fuel cell electric bus process is that we don’t have range effects by weather, congestion, or mile types that we can see with battery electric bus operation.”

But although the City has already purchased the buses, committee members wanted questions answered about buying electric buses instead and if grant funds used to buy the hydrogen buses can be repurposed.

Seventeen hydrogen buses are already in production and tied to existing grant commitments.

“Transit is only effective when it is reliable. As this item moves forward to the City Council, the question is what actually works for Pasadena residents and those who depend on our transit services,” Justin Jones, who chairs the committee, told Pasadena Now. “We need reliable service, zero emissions, ensure that we are making the right fiscal decision and a clear understanding of the alternatives.”

Staff said hydrogen buses offer longer range and operational flexibility, particularly during emergencies and power outages, and warned that delaying the project could jeopardize funding and fleet replacement timelines.

But committee members repeatedly questioned the long-term viability of the strategy, raising concerns about cost, efficiency, fuel supply and whether the city is locking itself into infrastructure before fully evaluating alternatives.

Councilmember Rick Cole said the city should not move forward without a clearer understanding of the financial and operational implications.

“If we’re going to revisit this decision, now is the least expensive moment we will ever have before we build the fueling station, not after,” Cole said during the meeting.

Cole ultimately modified his motion to focus on gathering additional information, and the committee voted unanimously to direct the City Manager’s office to determine whether grant funding tied to the hydrogen program can be transferred and what the consequences would be of switching to battery-electric buses.

The motion also asks staff to clarify conditions attached to existing funding and to evaluate the potential impacts of changing course after procurement has begun.

Staff cautioned that abandoning the hydrogen plan could require returning grant funds and paying additional costs to procure alternative buses, which are not currently funded.

They also warned that delays could affect transit service, noting that aging buses nearing the end of their lifecycle are becoming increasingly costly to maintain and could force service reductions if replacements are not delivered in time.

Committee members, however, signaled discomfort with moving forward without a more comprehensive analysis, including lifecycle costs, environmental impacts and long-term fuel availability.

Public comment echoed those concerns, with residents questioning whether hydrogen — much of which is currently produced from natural gas — aligns with the city’s climate goals and whether battery-electric buses offer a more efficient alternative.

At a City Council meeting earlier this month, Cole asked colleagues for a pause on consideration of a $316,800 contract with Stantec Consulting Services Inc. to support bidding and construction administration for a planned hydrogen fueling station intended to serve the transition to zero-emission buses.

“The landscape has changed dramatically under the Trump Administration,” Cole said in a memo to the mayor and Acting City Manager. “The supply of truly ‘green’ hydrogen is now clearly highly uncertain. Major supporting investments have stalled, and the broader market is shifting toward battery-electric systems.”

Cole cited the cancellation of more than $1 billion in funding for the planned ARCHES hydrogen hub, which is now stalled.

The item was paused and moved to the Municipal Services Committee. The item will now return to the City Council for a broader discussion early next month when its anticipated staff will return with answers to questions on grants and what other cities are doing.

“I understand why staff and my colleagues are reluctant to change direction,” Cole told Pasadena Now after the meeting. “But before we invest $50 million in hydrogen buses, we need to explore every alternative. What we heard today confirmed my doubts: there is no current source in Southern California for affordable green hydrogen. There is hope that one will emerge, but hope is not a plan. I fear we’ve chosen Betamax when the world is going for VHS.”