> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/intersect-budget-committee/committee-meeting-notes/2026-meeting-notes/budget-committee-weekly-meetings/august-24th-2026-budget-comm-minutes.md). # August 24th, 2026 Budget Comm Minutes **Budget Committee Weekly Meeting — August 24th, 2026** **Date:** August 24, 2026\ **Time:** 13:00 UTC **Attendees:** Megan Hess (Chair), Kristijan Kowalsky (Vice Chair), Eric Helms (SCATDAO), Fanny Wijaya, Rodrigo Pacini, Stephen Wood, Christina Gianelloni (SME), Simo Simovic (Acting Secretary), Lorenzo Bruno **Quorum:** Confirmed during the meeting (6 voting members present) ### 1. Opening Simo Simovic opened the meeting and provided an update on the previous week's discussion regarding the Product Committee's Cardano 2030 KPI survey. It was confirmed that the Budget Committee would provide consolidated written feedback rather than complete the survey directly. A draft feedback document had been prepared based on the previous meeting discussion, with additional input provided by Rodrigo Pacini. ### 2. Connection Between Vision 2030 and Annual Priorities The committee reviewed the first area of feedback, focused on strengthening the connection between the long-term Cardano 2030 vision and annual ecosystem priorities. Members agreed that the Vision 2030 framework provides long-term direction, but clearer annual priorities and a more defined strategy for each budget cycle would help ensure that funding decisions support measurable progress toward those objectives. The committee highlighted the importance of having clearer priorities for 2027 before designing the next budget process. ### 3. Rationale Behind KPI Targets The committee discussed the need for greater clarity around how individual KPI targets were established. Members supported providing more context around the assumptions and reasoning behind specific targets, including why particular numbers were selected, how different KPIs relate to one another, and how achieving them contributes to Cardano's long-term objectives. Additional context was provided that the existing KPIs were developed later in the Vision 2030 process and were expected to be further refined based on committee and ecosystem feedback. The committee agreed that clearer supporting rationale would make the framework easier for the community to understand, assess, and use. ### 4. Economic Sustainability The committee reviewed feedback proposing that long-term economic sustainability should be more explicitly considered within the KPI framework. Discussion included treasury inflows, transaction fees, network usage and fee generation, treasury expenditure, and the incentives required to maintain network participation. Rather than proposing a specific target at this stage, members supported considering an underlying economic sustainability model that could help determine which metrics and targets would be meaningful. The committee also discussed the potential value of tracking the growth of transaction-fee-based treasury inflows as part of understanding progress toward a more sustainable network model. ### 5. Connecting KPIs, Funding and Results The committee discussed the importance of tracking how treasury funding contributes to the Vision 2030 strategy and KPIs. For the 2026 Budget Process, proposals were required to identify the strategic objectives and KPIs they intended to support. Members agreed that, as funded projects begin delivering, it would be useful to track: * Which strategic priorities receive treasury funding. * How funding is distributed across those priorities. * Which KPIs funded initiatives committed to support. * Whether delivery ultimately contributes to measurable progress. The committee noted that this should be considered at the ecosystem level rather than being solely the responsibility of the Budget Committee. ### 6. KPI Ownership and Governance The committee discussed broader questions around how the Vision 2030 KPI framework should be managed over time. Members highlighted the need for clarity on who owns the KPIs, who approves changes, who verifies progress, how frequently the framework should be reviewed, and how progress should influence future strategic priorities and budget cycles. There was agreement that these questions extend beyond the remit of any single committee and may require broader ecosystem and governance alignment. The committee supported adding these questions to its formal feedback. ### 7. Finalizing the Budget Committee Feedback The committee agreed to continue reviewing the draft feedback document before finalizing it. Members were asked to review both the consolidated draft and the additional feedback submitted during the week, add comments or suggested edits directly in the document, and identify any missing points. The possibility of discussing the feedback directly with the Product Committee was also raised, allowing both committees to clarify questions and continue refining the framework together. An update was also provided that internal discussions had begun regarding Intersect's role in the 2027 Budget Process. Further information will be shared with the Budget Committee once greater alignment has been reached. ### 8. Actions and Next Steps * Committee members to review the KPI feedback document and add comments or suggested edits. * Incorporate additional feedback into the consolidated Budget Committee response. * Add questions around KPI ownership, approval, verification, and ongoing maintenance. * Finalize the Budget Committee's feedback on the Vision 2030 KPI framework. * Consider a joint discussion with the Product Committee to review the feedback and outstanding questions. * Continue internal discussions on Intersect's role in the 2027 Budget Process and update the committee once further direction is available. --- # Agent Instructions This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com. ## Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the following URL with the `ask` and `goal` query parameters: ``` GET https://committees.docs.intersectmbo.org/intersect-budget-committee/committee-meeting-notes/2026-meeting-notes/budget-committee-weekly-meetings/august-24th-2026-budget-comm-minutes.md?ask=&goal= ``` `ask` is the immediate question: it should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. `goal` is what the user is ultimately trying to achieve, the reason they need the answer. Sharing it helps GitBook give you a better, more relevant answer. A goal is most helpful when it describes the outcome the user wants rather than restating the question. For example, with `ask=how do I create an API token`, a goal like `automate deployments from our CI pipeline` lets GitBook tailor the answer to that use case. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.