# March 23 2026 ## Attendees: | Name | Attendance | Role | Voting Seat (Y/N) | | ---------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | ------------------------------- | ----------------- | | [Simo Simovic](mailto:simo.simovic@intersectmbo.org) | Yes | Secretary | 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 --- # Agent Instructions: Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation dynamically by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the current page URL with the `ask` query parameter: ``` GET https://steeringcommittee.docs.intersectmbo.org/committee-meeting-notes/2026-meeting-notes/march-23-2026.md?ask= ``` The question should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. 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.