Simo shared a document generated from last week's Miro board brainstorming session regarding committee roles and responsibilities.
Lorenzo noted that about 30–40% of these recommendations are already being aligned with the current election cycle.
The group agreed to take a quick reading pause during the meeting to review the committee member and committee chair sections.
| Working Group: Review the shared document and leave direct comments/suggestions. | | Defining the Role of Committee Members |Thiago and Gintama highlighted that the document felt too passive and reactive (focused mostly on "advising and supervising").
Gintama emphasized that committee members must have a proactive role in planning and strategizing, rather than leaving it solely to the chair or secretary.
Lorenzo added a suggestion to the document to explicitly include "bringing relevant proposals and ideas."
The group discussed adding concrete examples under high-level headlines (e.g., hosting town halls, writing blogs, joining X spaces) and establishing a "minimum expected participation" standard.
| Lorenzo: Clean up and expand the high-level responsibilities with concrete examples and ways of working (ethos). | | Committees vs. Working Groups & Execution |Thiago raised concerns about continuity, structural execution, and accountability across cohorts (e.g., within the MCC).
Lorenzo reminded the group that committees are legally advisory bodies whose primary output is making recommendations (per the bylaws), while the execution/delivery is typically outsourced or assigned to full-time staff, funded entities, or sub-working groups to prevent volunteering roles from turning into uncompensated full-time jobs.
| Lorenzo: Collate existing definitions from the bylaws and knowledge base into a separate empty document to clarify the structural differences between committees and working groups. | | Mentorship & Community Inclusion |Gintama pointed out a recent Product Committee research post that required 5 years of experience, arguing that committees should actively mentor new community members rather than just hiring outside experts.
Suggested that hired experts or committee members host 1 or 2 open workshops during a project so newcomers can learn the process and volunteer.
| Working Group: Consider adding mentorship/educational obligations to the committee "ways of working" recommendations. | | Rights, Benefits, & Accountability Policies |Thiago suggested splitting the document into distinct sections: Roles, Responsibilities, and Rights (such as voting rights) so new applicants understand their value.
Gintama noted that communication, community accountability, and public data availability (ensuring minutes and docs are posted on time) were missing from the chair and secretary descriptions.
Gintama also requested that the dismissal, replacement, and unfulfillment of duties policies be clearly linked on the very first page so applicants understand the accountability stakes.
|Lorenzo: Integrate public documentation tracking into the Secretary's role.
Lorenzo: Add a link to the dismissal/replacement policy on the main application/onboarding overview.
| | Election Timelines & Term Extensions |Gintama expressed concerns regarding a proposal to extend the terms of the current October cohort by 6 months, citing poor performance/contribution from some members, and suggested adjusting the timeline in a phased manner starting in 2029 instead.
Lorenzo clarified the structural shift: transitioning from 1-year to 2-year terms means elections will become annual instead of biannual. April 2026 will elect the first batch of 2-year members. To stagger the groups, they are checking if the October 2025 cohort will extend to April 2027 (18 months).
Lorenzo noted that committee performance adjustments should be handled organically via an updated dismissal policy rather than altering the global election architecture.
| Working Group: Continue discussing the timeline/dismissal policy parameters over the coming weeks ahead of the October Board elections. | | Next Steps & Folder Management | The team needs a solid draft ready before mid-March so it can be integrated into the upcoming voting/application process starting on March 3rd. |Lorenzo / Simo: Clean up the document based on today's feedback by the end of the week.
Working Group: Save all relevant working group documents into a proper, centralized shared folder.
Simo / Lorenzo: Present the updated document to the Intersect Steering Committee (ISC) next week for initial feedback.
| --- # 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-steering-committee/working-group/working-groups/working-group-meeting-notes/2026/february-19-2026.md?ask=