Carmel Councilor Shares Participation Concern

Earlier this fall, a report surfaced indicating that City of Carmel officials were considering moving certain public meetings to earlier daytime hours, a change that would make it harder for many residents to participate in local government. Since then, the idea has continued to gain attention. The question at the center of it is simple: should Carmel make civic participation more difficult for working people?

Recently, the Carmel Plan Commission answered that question clearly when it voted to keep its meeting times in the evening for 2026. It was the right decision for transparency and accessibility. 

The next evening, the Carmel Redevelopment Commission (CRC) took up the same issue. 

I made a motion to keep CRC meetings at their long-standing 6:30 p.m. start time, because we have been told there is strong interest in moving them to 4 p.m. The motion resulted in a 2–2 vote, meaning the proposal will return for further consideration next month.

The push for daytime meetings has largely been framed as a cost-saving measure. But when I asked at the meeting how much money the CRC would actually save, no estimate — not even a rough one — was provided. We do know that shifting all boards and commissions to daytime hours has been estimated to save just over $170,000, or 0.12% of the City’s budget. The CRC is only one board, and its presenting staff are salaried and don’t receive overtime. Any savings here would be minimal at best.

The City Council already appropriated additional funding specifically to support meeting-related costs. Public participation is foundational to good government, not an expendable convenience.

And the reality is undeniable: most residents cannot attend midafternoon meetings. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that 82% of employed Americans work between 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. A 3 or 4 p.m. meeting time falls exactly when many people are still at work or picking up children from school. Even if only a few attend in person, access must remain open to all.

This is especially important for the CRC, which has spent years rebuilding public trust and strengthening transparency. A move to midafternoon meetings risks sending the opposite message.

It could also limit who is able to serve. Today’s commissioners may have flexible schedules, but future ones may not. Civic boards should reflect the full community, including working families and young professionals.

The conversation will continue next month, and it’s vital that Carmel choose the path that protects transparency.

City Councilor Adam Aasen (R-SE District) represents southeast Carmel and is president of the council for 2025.