Mar 10, 2025 Budget Meeting Notes

Role	Name	Voting Member
Chair	Prof. Steven	Yes
Member	Pepe (Jose Maria Francisco Otegui Alvarez)	Yes
Member	Jose Velazquez	Yes
Member	Mercy	Yes
Member	Kristijan Kowalsky	Yes
Member	Shunsuke Murasaki	Yes
Member	Kriss Baird	Yes
Member	J.J. Siler (absent)	Yes
Member	Andreas Pletscher (absent/proxy seat)	Yes

---

Attendees

• Voting Members Present

  • Prof. Steven (Chair)

  • Pepe (Jose Maria Francisco Otegui Alvarez)

  • Jose Velazquez

  • Mercy

  • Kristijan Kowalsky

  • Shunsuke Murasaki

  • Kriss Baird

• Observers / Other Participants

  • Lawrence Clark (Intersect)

  • Lloyd Duhon (Secretary)

  • Nicolas Cerny

  • Micah Kendall

  • Simo Simovic

Absentees

• J.J. Siler

• Andreas Pletscher

---

Agenda

1. Roll Call & Agenda Review

2. Social Updates After Friday’s Announcement

3. Future Role of DReps & Delegated Authority

4. Working Group Updates

   • Audit

   • Tax

   • Treasury / Smart Contract WG

5. Open Discussion / Any Other Business

---

Summary

1. Roll Call & Agenda Review

• Lloyd Duhon opened the meeting, noting attendees and known absences.

• Added agenda items included:

  • Plan to revisit Budget Committee’s own budget after DRep feedback has been gathered.

  • Ongoing concerns about ClickUp access for some committee members.

2. Social Updates After Friday’s Announcement

• Mixed Reception to New “DRep-Centered” Approach:

  • Some applaud greater DRep involvement; others worry that DReps lack the time or willingness to perform detailed proposal reviews.

  • Members stressed that Intersect committees should continue guiding and supporting DReps with specialized knowledge rather than DReps doing all the heavy lifting themselves.

• Need for Clarity:

  • How exactly do proposals move from the “open form” stage to final approval?

  • If multiple proposals exceed the Net Change Limit, how do DReps handle prioritization or subsequent net change adjustments?

  • Many see a continuing role for committees in providing technical or financial advisory to DReps.

3. Future Role of DReps & Delegated Authority

• Mandate from DReps:

  • The committee discussed ways that DReps can formally empower Intersect or committees to handle vendor selection, milestone reviews, etc.

  • The consensus is that any such “mandate” must be clearly spelled out in the final on-chain proposal (info action), so that DReps explicitly approve the role and budget for each committee or working group.

• Questions Raised by Japanese DReps (from Murasaki’s report):

  1. If a DRep submits a proposal, can they vote on their own proposal? (Likely yes; subject to community/delegator scrutiny.)

  2. How does the process determine if a new proposal is part of a committee budget vs. a standalone ask?

  3. If a proposal is not folded into a committee’s scope, can it still proceed as a separate budget request? (Yes; the system is effectively open.)

4. Working Group Updates

Audit Working Group

• Jose Velazquez and Kristijan K. discussed steps to gather a shortlist of potential auditors (global coverage, Big Four, others).

• Plan to post a Terms of Reference on Gov Tools, allowing DReps and the broader community to review and comment.

• The group also may propose a part-time stipend for persistent working-group roles, given the volume of tasks.

Tax Working Group

• No major new updates; the group continues coordinating membership data to guide possible tax consultancies.

• They plan to align efforts with the Audit WG to avoid duplicating due-diligence or onboarding multiple vendors unnecessarily.

Treasury / Smart Contract Working Group

• Lawrence noted that treasury planning is pivoting toward smart-contract development for the 2025 budget distribution.

• The committee voted unanimously to spin up a new “Smart Contract WG” under the Budget Committee. Lawrence will lead initial discussions, with updates to follow at future meetings.

5. Open Discussion / Other Business

• Net Change Limit Timing:

  • Some advocated delaying the NCL on-chain action to avoid having to do it twice if the total budget proposals exceed the initial limit.

  • The group acknowledged multiple net change limits are possible, but that might introduce extra delay and confusion.

• ClickUp Access:

  • Several members reported losing access to the Intersect ClickUp workspace. Lawrence will follow up to restore “guest” permissions.

• Concern About Blindsiding:

  • Chris K. and Mercy both expressed feeling they are “on the outside,” learning decisions after the fact. Lawrence committed to inviting Budget Committee members to the Intersect “task force” sessions so they can help shape the new process details rather than just be informed afterward.

---

Action Items

1. Restore ClickUp Access

   • Owner: Lawrence Clark / Intersect Team

   • Deadline: ASAP

   • Description: Resolve new membership/guest issues so all Budget Committee members can see and collaborate in the shared workspace.

2. Publish (Draft) Process Flow

   • Owner: Lawrence & Task Force Team

   • Deadline: Next 1–2 weeks

   • Description: Create a visual flow of how proposals move from the open form to final DRep approval, clarifying roles for committees, DReps, and Intersect.

3. Audit Working Group - Terms of Reference

   • Owner: Jose Velazquez & Kristijan K.

   • Deadline: Next few days

   • Description: Post the draft ToR on Gov Tools (or relevant forum) for community/DRep feedback. Include potential auditor shortlists.

4. Smart Contract Working Group

   • Owner: Lawrence Clark / Volunteers

   • Deadline: Ongoing

   • Description: Form new working group to tackle the technical design and feasibility of distributing budget payments via smart contracts.

5. Engagement with DReps

   • Owner: Intersect & Budget Committee

   • Deadline: Ongoing

   • Description: Plan open calls or direct outreach to clarify the new “DRep-centered” approach, gather their questions/concerns, and refine the upcoming on-chain process (e.g., net change limit timing, final budget vote).