December 04, 2025
Attendees:
Name
Attendance
Role
Phil Lewis
No
ISC Member
Thiago Nunes
Yes
Intersect Member
Kristijan Kowalsky
Yes
Former CBC Chair
Nicholas Cerny
Yes
Civics Committee Chair
Vaibhav S
Yes
Intersect Member
Jose Iadicicco
No
Community Member
Maureen Wepngong
Yes
DRep
Terence McCutcheon
No
Intersect
Lorenzo Bruno
Yes
Head of Product Curation at Intersect
Kevin Hammond
Yes
TSC Chair
Recording: Intersect Governance WG Weekly - 2025/12/04 15:00 CET - Recording
Transcript: Intersect Governance WG Weekly - 2025/12/04 15:00 CET - Transcript
Agenda 04.12.2025
Committee Chair/Vice Chair Election Process
Decisions/Actions
Discussion Point
Notes
Actions: Responsible / Note
Chair/Vice Chair Election Policy Background
The discussion focused on standardizing the Chair/Vice Chair election process, as current practices vary (two common methods identified: Election of vice chair which results from automatic Vice Chair promotion vs. electing Chair). The goal is to agree on a single policy for submission to the Intersect Steering Committee (IC).
Share the draft policy document with all participants. The Secretary (Simo) to reschedule the Working Group call to be weekly to finalize the policy document (next calls planned for the 11th and 18th).
Review of Current Election Methods (Miro Board)
Two main processes were reviewed: 1. Elect Vice Chair, then Automatic Promotion: Pros: Continuity. Cons: Forces the committee to elect a Vice Chair from a smaller pool (new members) who may be unknown, and forces a Chair change every six months, which could create friction if the incumbent Chair is effective and wishes to stay. 2. Elect Chair/Vice Chair Every Term: Pros: Allows the committee to elect the most suitable person for the current moment, offers better continuity if the incumbent is re-elected, and is generally preferred by committees like TSC and Product. Cons: The Vice Chair might lack prior context. Conclusion: The policy should provide structure but not force committees to change the Chair if the incumbent is effective and willing to continue, unless another candidate steps forward.
The Working Group to review the draft policy, ensuring it provides flexibility for committees while defining mandatory triggers for elections.
Chair and Vice Chair Responsibilities
A participant questioned if the responsibilities and duties of the Chair are clearly defined, arguing that clear definition is necessary to justify the importance of holding an election at all. It was noted that the Chair receives extra compensation for extra effort.
Ensure the policy document includes a clear description of the Chair and Vice Chair responsibilities and duties.
Vice Chair Selection and Role
A participant criticized the practice of the second-highest vote-getter automatically becoming Vice Chair, arguing it doesn't guarantee the person is suitable or willing, and that it might create conflict with the Chair. Key Role of Vice Chair: To guarantee continuity of leadership when the Chair is unavailable or steps down. The policy must ensure the nominated Vice Chair confirms their willingness to serve. The Working Group to decide if the Vice Chair must be confirmed or elected separately.
Add a requirement that the proposed Vice Chair must confirm their acceptance of the role and its responsibilities.
Chair Removal and Vacancy
Discussion on what constitutes Chair unavailability (resignation, conflict of interest, or removal via a "vote of no confidence"). The existing Dismissal Policy was referenced as the mechanism for removal. The policy needs to clarify procedures for addressing vacancies (e.g., Vice Chair stepping in). An issue was raised regarding rewarding absence and punishing participation when removal is difficult and replacement requires long election cycles.
Lorenzo to send a separate message/follow-up to an MCC member (Maureen) regarding confusion over the dismissal process.
Triggering a Chair Election (Mandatory vs. Optional)
The policy is designed to be optional unless triggered. Triggers include: 1. Chair Vacancy: Resignation, conflict of interest, removal, or end of committee term (if not re-elected). 2. Member Motion: A member can raise a motion to hold a new election. Debate: The threshold for triggering a motion for an election (Simple Majority vs. two people seconding) was discussed, emphasizing the need to respect the incumbent's term and prevent constant re-elections.
The Working Group to determine the necessary majority threshold (e.g., Simple Majority of committee members) required to pass a motion to hold an election between regular cycles.
Ensure the mandatory triggers (like vacancy/resignation) are clearly defined.
Chair Term Length
The current term is technically six months, aligning with committee election cycles. The consensus supports extending the committee member term to two years, which would logically make the Chair's term one year by default to align with the staggered annual election cycles.
The Working Group to recommend a standard Chair term (likely one year) that aligns with the proposed two-year committee term structure.
Single Candidate and Election Process
In cases where there is only one candidate (only the incumbent Chair applying, or a new person applying with no competition), the committee must still vote to confirm the candidate, ensuring the person has the committee's confidence (not just assuming approval). Nomination Process: Should allow self-nomination and must require candidates to confirm willingness to serve (e.g., via the member area system) and provide a motivation. The process should ideally be open and async (e.g., open nomination period following committee elections) to encourage shy members to apply.
The Working Group to clarify that even with one candidate, a vote of confirmation by the committee is required. Governance Support (Lorenzo) to
Draft the nomination process, requiring confirmation/motivation via the member area.
Last updated