March 23 2026
Attendees:
Name
Attendance
Role
Voting Seat (Y/N)
Jack Briggs
Yes
Executive Director
Y
Nick Cook
Yes
Director - Operations (Interim)
Y
Sheldon Hunt
Yes
Community Member Seat
Y
Fred Tanaka
Yes
Community Member Seat
Y
Kristijan Kowalsky
Yes
Community Member Seat
Y
Jose Miguel de Gamboa
Yes
Community Member Seat
Y
Georg Link
No
OSC Chair
Y
Samuel Leathers
Yes
Product Chair
Y
Maureen Wepngogn
Yes
MCC Chair
Y
Megan Hess
Yes
CBC Chair
Y
Kevin Hammond
Yes
TSC Chair
Y
Tim Harrison
No
GMC Chair
Y
Nicolas Cerny
Yes
CCC Chair
Y
Lorenzo Bruno
Yes
Secretary of CPC
N
Bosko Majdanac
Yes
Secretary of TSC
N
Abhik Nag
Yes
Secretary of MCC
N
Lloyd Duhon
Yes
Secretary of Budget Committee
N
Larisa Mcfarlane
Yes
Secretary of CCC
N
Terence McCutcheon
Yes
Secretary of OSC & GMC
N
Lara Bonasorte
Yes
Secretary of GMC
N
Additional Attendees:
Adam Rusch - Member of the Intersect Board
Kavinda Kariyapperuma - Member of the Intersect Board
Mercy Fordwoo - Member of the Intersect Board
Nikhil Joshi - Member of the Intersect Board
Rand McHenry - Member of the Intersect Board
Ken-Erik Ølmheim - Vice Chair of Civics
Kyle Solomon - Vice Chair of Product
Udai Solanki - Vice Chair of OSC
Mike Hornan - Observer
Thiago Nunes - Observer
Wes Parkinson - Observer
Agenda:
Committee Budget overview
Q&A Committee Budget Proposal
Discussion/Actions
1. Opening & Agenda
The meeting opened with attendance confirmation and quorum established. It was noted that the session would be extended to 90 minutes to accommodate a structured budget proposal walkthrough from each committee and Intersect. The agenda focused on high-level overviews of proposed work packages, followed by Q&A and discussion with Board representatives. A reminder was also shared regarding the upcoming ISC quarterly session, where committees and Intersect will present Q1 outcomes and Q2 plans.
2. Committee Updates (Budget Proposal Overviews)
Intersect (Core Proposal) presented three primary work packages: (1) MBO operations, covering governance coordination, committee support, elections, and operational infrastructure; (2) critical processes, including election-related activities and consensus-building mechanisms where no clear owner exists; and (3) technical coordination and stewardship, including release management, incident response, bug bounty programs, and open source infrastructure oversight. It was noted that some areas may overlap with committee proposals and will be refined further.
Civics Committee shared a significantly refined proposal, focusing on two main areas: (1) a structured governance workshop program (both in-person and online), designed to build participation and understanding across ADA holders, DReps, and Constitutional Committee processes; and (2) recurring operational costs for Constitutional Committee elections. The committee emphasized a shift toward enabling community-led workshops through structured materials, rather than directly hosting all sessions.
Budget Committee outlined key focus areas including budget process refinement and reconciliation, development of governance tooling (e.g., Ekklesia), and a new treasury transparency initiative aimed at improving visibility and accessibility of financial data. The committee also confirmed its role in receiving and presenting financial audit outputs, without requesting additional budget for that function.
Product Committee presented work packages centered on ecosystem discovery and execution, including product research aligned with Vision 2030 and the introduction of market pilots to test real-world adoption opportunities. The committee noted that pilot execution would be highly selective and may not fully utilize allocated funds if strong opportunities are not identified. A broader need for ecosystem-level business development was highlighted.
Open Source Committee (OSC) shared a continuation of its paid open source model, including maintainer retainers, tooling sustainability funding, developer advocacy, strategic event presence, and metrics/reporting. The committee also outlined plans for future hackathon support and emphasized alignment with global open source practices and ecosystem visibility.
Technical Steering Committee (TSC) presented four work packages: (1) community-facing technical coordination (including workshops), (2) support for security council engagement and vulnerability handling, (3) protocol governance and evolution support (including advisory input to governance bodies), and (4) development of a broader pool of technical reviewers to support proposal evaluation. The committee emphasized the need to professionalize technical contributions currently delivered on a voluntary basis.
3. Key Discussion Themes
Workshops & Delivery Model
A detailed discussion was held on how workshops should be structured and delivered across committees. Key considerations included:
Whether to adopt an RFP-based model for community-led workshops
The need to balance openness with quality control and consistency
Ensuring committees retain oversight for critical or high-impact workshops
Different approaches were discussed across committees, with general alignment that a hybrid model (committee-led + selectively community-driven) may be most effective.
Avoiding Duplication & Coordination
Several participants raised concerns about potential duplication across committee proposals and between committees and Intersect. Examples included:
Technical coordination vs TSC responsibilities
Product pilots vs external ecosystem initiatives
Workshop programs across multiple committees
It was agreed that further alignment is required to clearly define ownership and avoid inefficiencies.
Community Participation & Execution Model
Discussion highlighted uncertainty around how community members will engage with funded work:
Whether contributors should be identified before or after funding approval
The need for clear frameworks and fallback options if suitable contributors are not identified
Potential approaches such as early engagement (as tested by Product Committee) or structured post-approval processes
The importance of maintaining community confidence in execution capability was emphasized.
KPIs & Measuring Impact
Questions were raised regarding how success will be measured, particularly for initiatives such as governance workshops. Proposed metrics included:
DRep registrations and participation
Voting engagement and rationale quality
Broader governance participation indicators
It was acknowledged that measuring direct impact may be challenging, but directional indicators will be used.
Intersect Value Proposition
A broader discussion emerged regarding how Intersect’s value is articulated:
The need to better communicate why Intersect exists and what value it provides
Clarifying the relationship between members, committees, and the wider Cardano community
Positioning Intersect as a coordination layer for the ecosystem, rather than just an operational entity
It was agreed that this narrative requires strengthening ahead of the budget submission.
Governance Gaps & Priorities
Participants highlighted areas that may require more explicit inclusion in proposals, including:
DRep engagement and coordination mechanisms
Compensation frameworks and governance incentives
Broader community integration into governance processes
5. Actions & Next Steps
Board to review all proposals and provide consolidated feedback in the upcoming Board meeting
Intersect & Committees to refine proposals based on feedback, particularly addressing duplication, clarity, and value articulation
Strengthen the Intersect value proposition and strategic narrative ahead of submission
Last updated