Governance ReviewNo. 19Epochs 579 to 58127 Aug 2025 to 11 Sept 2025

Cardano's elected committee takes office, and constitution v2.0 expires at 55.6%

Cardano's elected constitutional committee took office in epoch 581 as constitution v2.0 expired below the required 75% DRep support. Yoroi and EMURGO abstained on the revision, objecting to the removal of the separate budget approval required before a treasury withdrawal.

78.6%

of DRep power behind replacing the interim committee, with 56.0% of pool stake against a 51% bar

55.6%

of DRep power behind constitution v2.0, against the 75% a new constitution needs

committee members found both Snek listing withdrawals unconstitutional, six of them because no budget in effect authorised them

₳78.0M

of the ₳350M ceiling still unused at epoch 581, with ₳272.0M paid out

Seven elected members replace the interim committee

Replace Interim Constitutional Committee was ratified at the start of epoch 580 and enacted at the start of epoch 581, with 78.6% of DRep power behind it, on 261 yes votes to 5 no, and 56.0% of pool stake, against bars of 67% and 51%.

Its document, filed by Intersect, records an election Intersect hosted from 5 May to 6 July 2025 and gives the end of epoch 580 as the end of the interim committee’s term. The Cardano Atlantic Council, the Eastern Cardano Council and the Cardano Japan Council already sat on the interim committee, and Tingvard, KtorZ, Ace Alliance and Phil_uplc joined them. Tingvard, the Eastern Cardano Council and Ace Alliance hold terms of 146 epochs, through epoch 726, and the other four terms of 73 epochs, through epoch 653. The change removed the Cardano Foundation, Input Output Global, EMURGO and Intersect.

Yoroi W₳llet called the election “transparent, accessible, and independently verified”. CardanoYoda (MANDA Pool) wrote that for the first time committee members “are not affiliated with founding entities”. The Cardano Foundation, which had endorsed seven candidates, found the final composition “aligned with our recommendations”. It also wrote that two members of its governance advisory team are on the new committee, Matthias Benkort as an individual member and Nicolas Cerny through Ace Alliance, and that both recused themselves from its vote.

Constitution v2.0 expires at 55.6% of DRep power

CARDANO BLOCKCHAIN ECOSYSTEM CONSTITUTION v2.0 expired at the start of epoch 581 with 55.6% of DRep power behind it, on 160 yes votes, 53 no and 25 abstain, against the 75% a new constitution needs. Its document lists wording fixes, new definitions, corrected typos and the removal of unused provisions such as the codes of conduct for DReps and pool operators. It would also have removed the requirement that a treasury withdrawal be covered by a budget information action.

Constitution v2.0 and the committee replacement against their bars

Yes share of counted power, against the bar each vote had to reach

A new constitution needs 75% of DRep power and the committee's approval. A new committee needs 67% of DRep power and 51% of pool stake, and the committee does not vote on it.

Yoroi and EMURGO abstained. Yoroi wrote that removing the budget information action “weakens financial transparency around treasury withdrawals” and that the proposal “moved on-chain while feedback was still being raised”. EMURGO wrote that the removal “weakens the link between treasury withdrawals and long-term priorities”. The Eternl DRep Committee voted no and called a new duty to disclose holding several roles “not enforcable”, since an anonymous DRep could also be an anonymous pool operator. Sebastien Guillemot セバ voted no over the roadmap information action proposed in place of the budget one, which he expects to be “too prone to have the process captured and centralized”.

YUTA voted yes, writing that the revision supports builders more efficiently and adds disclosure duties in exchange for the budget step. Phil UPLC wrote that the scope was too large for one amendment, but that the redundancy of separate budget and withdrawal proposals was “so unbelievably bad” that he voted yes. The Cardano Foundation voted yes and answered the process objection: the drafting had no workshops or convention, and “we do not agree that this should be a requirement”.

On the committee, Input Output Global, the Cardano Foundation, EMURGO and the Cardano Atlantic Council found the revision constitutional. The Cardano Japan Council found it unconstitutional, citing the skipped information action stage and the lack of discussion in community forums, and the Eastern Cardano Council abstained over “significant process-related concerns regarding participatory legitimacy”. The Intersect Constitutional Council abstained, writing that its vote would be recorded but not counted and calling it its last act as an interim member. The Cardano Japan Council came back on the new committee with a new credential after a change in its membership, so its interim vote did not carry over. When the revision expired, only the Cardano Atlantic Council and the Eastern Cardano Council had votes on it under credentials still in office.

Both Snek listing requests expire

Withdraw ₳5M for Cardano’s Global Listing Expansion - Powered by Snek and Cardano Global Listing Expansion - Powered by Snek, the Snek Foundation’s two requests for the listing plan covered in the review of epochs 573 to 575, expired at the start of epoch 580 with 5.7% and 5.5% of DRep power. Both documents ask for ₳5M to list the SNEK token on centralised exchanges and retail brokers, provide liquidity for its ada pairs and pay legal and compliance costs, but the second request’s withdrawal on chain was ₳5. All seven interim committee members found both unconstitutional. The Cardano Japan Council cited missing provisions for independent audits and a budget breakdown, and the other six wrote that no budget in effect authorised the withdrawals.

Yoroi voted no, writing that the request “lacks a clear funding structure that ensures tangible returns for the ecosystem”, and encouraged the Snek Foundation to return “starting with an info budget action”. EMURGO asked for a repayment model or a shared infrastructure plan, the Eternl DRep Committee and YUTA for a treasury repayment plan, and Dave voted no, writing that without “a repayment or profit-share model” it could not support the precedent. SIPO wrote that the Snek Foundation had already self funded over $4M of listings and that approval would invite other token projects to ask the treasury for private listings. The Cardano Foundation abstained on both, to give the Snek team “space to complete this work” on a revised proposal.

In epoch 580 the Snek Foundation and Intersect filed Budget: ₳5M Loan for Cardano’s Global Listing Expansion - Powered by Snek, a budget information action for the same plan that asks for the ₳5M as a loan at 2.44% a year, with Intersect administering the funds. Its deadline was the start of epoch 587, and the review of epochs 585 to 587 has its repayment terms and the result.

The Oceania regional plan asks for ₳778,000

Cardano in Oceania, filed in epoch 579, is a budget information action asking for ₳778,000 for training and mentoring local advocates, a hackathon, meetups and marketing in the region. Its administrator, selfdriven Services, would release the money milestone by milestone, and a disputed milestone could be appealed to the DReps through an information action. Its deadline was the start of epoch 586, and the review of epochs 585 to 587 has the result.

No withdrawal is paid and ₳78.0M stays unused

The window recorded 401 votes, 335 from DReps, 61 from pools and 5 from committee members, with final votes from 175 distinct DReps and 59 pools. The power delegated to DReps rose ₳97.1M to ₳5.63B at epoch 581, the highest reading up to then, held by 853 DReps, the ten largest holding 49.1% of it. The treasury reading rose ₳8.3M to ₳1.58B. No withdrawal was paid in the three epochs, and of the ₳350M the ceiling allows through the end of epoch 604, ₳272.0M had been paid and ₳78.0M remained.

Decided in this window

Action	Amount	Outcome	DRep yes
Withdraw ₳5M for Cardano's Global Listing Expansion - Powered by Snek	₳5.0M	Expired 580	5.7%
Replace Interim Constitutional Committee		Enacted 581	78.6%
Cardano Global Listing Expansion - Powered by Snek	₳5	Expired 580	5.5%
CARDANO BLOCKCHAIN ECOSYSTEM CONSTITUTION v2.0		Expired 581	55.6%

Open at the close of the window

Action	Status	DRep yes
Cardano in Oceania: A community-led strategic plan for investing in growth.	Voting ends at the start of epoch 586	n/a
Budget: ₳5M Loan for Cardano's Global Listing Expansion - Powered by Snek	Voting ends at the start of epoch 587	n/a

n/a: the record holds no DRep share from inside this window for this action, only a tally read after it closed.

The numbers behind the window

Delegated to DReps, at the start of epoch 579: ₳5.53B
Delegated to DReps, at the start of epoch 581: ₳5.63B
Votes cast in the window, superseded votes included: 401
DReps whose final vote fell in the window: 175
Treasury, at the start of epoch 579: ₳1,572.7M
Treasury, at the start of epoch 581: ₳1,580.9M

DRep shares are the share of counted power: abstaining power is left out, while power that did not vote and power delegated to the always no confidence option are folded into the no side. Pool shares on a committee change are yes stake over counted pool stake against their own bar. Committee shares are yes votes over the members active at the decision minus those who abstained.
Seats, authorised voting keys and the protocol minimum size are three different quantities and are not merged here. The snapshot lists the members that had an authorised key as of epoch 581 and holds no value at all for the minimum committee size, while flagging two of the decisions at these boundaries as taken by a committee below it. Nothing in this edition derives an outcome from that flag. The four members with an authorised key are named by matching their cold keys to the credentials the committee replacement document lists for each elected member, and their terms are the ones the snapshot stores, which match that document.
Why the revision failed needs no reconstruction: 55.61% of DRep power is below the 75% a new constitution requires, so the DRep side settled it whatever the committee did. The stored committee figures for it count only the Cardano Atlantic Council and the Eastern Cardano Council, the two members who voted and whose seats were still in office when it expired. The positions of the other interim members are reported from their own votes and rationales, not from that tally.
What the revision would have changed, how the new committee was elected, and what the listing plan, the loan budget and the regional plan ask for, are read from their own documents, named under the sources below. The committee reasons on the listing requests are read from the rationales each of the seven members published, matched to the member through the hot key of its vote. The other reasons quoted are the published rationales of the voters named, cited under the sources below, and say nothing about voters who published none.
Neither proposal open at the close is decided here, so no share is given for them from inside this window. Votes cast is every vote of epochs 579 to 581 across all three roles, superseded votes included, and per epoch DRep counts exclude votes without a block time. Delegated power excludes the predefined delegation options. The ceiling in force runs to the end of epoch 604, which is not the end epoch the site registry carries today, because a later action extended the period.

Sources and further reading

33 sources, open the list

Yoroi voted yes on the committee replacement, writing that the election process was transparent, accessible and independently verified, and that the varied term lengths balance stability with regular opportunities for new participation. the rationale of Yoroi on the committee replacement
The Cardano Foundation voted yes on the committee replacement, writing that it had developed an assessment methodology for the nominated candidates and endorsed seven of them, that the final composition of the proposed committee is aligned with its recommendations, and that two members of its governance advisory team, Matthias Benkort as an individual member and Nicolas Cerny as part of Ace Alliance, are members of the proposed committee and recused themselves from its vote. the rationale of the Cardano Foundation on the committee replacement
CardanoYoda voted yes on the committee replacement, writing that the election ran smoothly with no complaints noted, that the incoming members were the ones it had voted for, and that for the first time the committee members are not affiliated with founding entities. the rationale of CardanoYoda on the committee replacement
Yoroi abstained on the revision, writing that removing the budget information action weakens financial transparency around treasury withdrawals, that the changes to the automatic abstention safeguard reduce clarity on its role, and that the proposal moved on chain while feedback was still being raised. the rationale of Yoroi on the revision
EMURGO abstained on the revision, writing that removing the budget information action weakens the link between treasury withdrawals and long term priorities, that changes to the automatic abstention safeguard create ambiguity, and that broader consensus had not yet been reached. the rationale of EMURGO on the revision
The Eternl DRep Committee voted no on the revision after going through the changes line by line, writing that a requirement for anyone holding multiple roles to disclose the overlap is not enforceable because an anonymous DRep could also be an anonymous pool operator, and that it was leaning towards abstaining. the rationale of the Eternl DRep Committee on the revision
Sebastien Guillemot voted no on the revision, writing that he agrees with the changes in principle but not with replacing the budget information action by a roadmap information action, which he expects to be too limiting and prone to capture. the rationale of Sebastien Guillemot on the revision
YUTA voted yes on the revision, writing that its biggest reason is to support builders more efficiently while strengthening financial soundness, that disclosure requirements are added in exchange for removing the budget information action, and that withdrawals totalling less than 1,000,000 ada within two years are freed from audit requirements. the rationale of YUTA on the revision
The Cardano Foundation voted yes on the revision, writing that much of the discussion focused on the drafting process, which had no global workshops or convention, that it does not agree such a process should be a requirement, that the proposal followed the amendment process the constitution requires, and that the civics committee could lead refinement of the amendment process. the rationale of the Cardano Foundation on the revision
Phil UPLC voted yes on the revision, writing that the scope of changes is too large and that amendments should change a single item, but that the redundancy of separate budget and withdrawal proposals wastes so much money and time that he was compelled to vote for it. the rationale of Phil UPLC on the revision
The Cardano Japan Council found the revision unconstitutional, writing that the constitution expects amendments to follow periodic review and discussion in community forums, that this proposal relied on limited discussion on social media and personal spreadsheets and skipped the information action stage, and that many voters encountered the draft only at submission. the rationale of the Cardano Japan Council on the revision
The Eastern Cardano Council abstained on the revision, writing that the proposal satisfies the formal procedural requirements of the constitution but raises significant process related concerns about participatory legitimacy. the rationale of the Eastern Cardano Council on the revision
The Intersect Constitutional Council abstained on the revision with a vote recorded in epoch 580. Its rationale, written as of the end of epoch 578, says the committee replacement appeared likely to be enacted before this action closed, so that its vote would be recorded but not counted, and records the vote as a formality and as its last act as an interim committee member. the rationale of the Intersect Constitutional Council on the revision
Yoroi voted no on the larger listing request, writing that the Snek team has a history of delivering exchange listings but that the request lacks a funding structure that ensures tangible returns for the ecosystem, and encouraging the Snek Foundation to return with an updated plan starting with a budget information action. the rationale of Yoroi on the larger listing request
YUTA voted no on the larger listing request, writing that it recommends adding a treasury repayment plan, measurable targets and an analysis of what the token's existing listing on one large exchange had done for the ecosystem. the rationale of YUTA on the larger listing request
EMURGO voted no on the larger listing request, writing that treasury money for exchange listings should be tied to measurable benefits for the broader ecosystem through shared infrastructure, demonstrable return or repayment to the treasury, and inviting a revised version with either a repayment model or a shared infrastructure plan. the rationale of EMURGO on the larger listing request
The Eternl DRep Committee voted no on the larger listing request, writing that it includes exchanges the token is already listed on, that token communities should provide their own liquidity, and that with a proper treasury repayment plan it might vote in favour in the future. the rationale of the Eternl DRep Committee on the larger listing request
The Cardano Foundation abstained on both listing requests, writing that the Snek team was revising its initiative into a new proposal addressing community feedback and that it abstained to give the Snek team space to complete that work. the rationale of the Cardano Foundation on the larger listing request
SIPO voted no on the larger listing request, writing that the Snek Foundation had self funded over $4M of prior listings and that approving the request would encourage other token projects to ask the treasury for private listings. the rationale of SIPO on the larger listing request
Dave voted no on the larger listing request, writing that when the treasury funds a project's commercial growth a clear pathway for value to return must be included, and that the proposal lacks a repayment or profit share model. the rationale of Dave on the larger listing request
The Eastern Cardano Council published the rationale for its no vote on the larger listing request: the constitution permits no withdrawal that is not being made pursuant to a budget then in effect, and this action had no budget information action associated with it. the rationale of the Eastern Cardano Council on the larger listing request
Input Output Global, voting as a committee member, found both listing requests unconstitutional, writing that the constitution prohibits treasury withdrawals not authorised by a previously approved budget information action and that neither request was. the rationale of Input Output Global as a committee member on the larger listing request
EMURGO, voting as a committee member, found both listing requests unconstitutional, writing that neither was accompanied by a budget information action authorising the withdrawal, as the constitution requires. the rationale of EMURGO as a committee member on the larger listing request
The Intersect Constitutional Council found both listing requests unconstitutional, writing that they were submitted without a previously approved budget information action, which immediately renders both unconstitutional, and that the smaller request carried 5 ada on chain instead of 5,000,000, likely through a confusion of ada and lovelace. the rationale of the Intersect Constitutional Council on the larger listing request
The Cardano Foundation, voting as a committee member, found both listing requests unconstitutional, writing that neither had an approved budget in place covering the withdrawal, against the two step process of budget and withdrawal the constitution requires. the rationale of the Cardano Foundation as a committee member on the larger listing request
The Cardano Atlantic Council found both listing requests unconstitutional, writing that each withdrawal had been made without an actively approved budget action as the constitution requires. the rationale of the Cardano Atlantic Council on the larger listing request
The Cardano Japan Council found both listing requests unconstitutional, primarily under the constitution's requirement of independent audits and transparent budget management, writing that the proposal gave no sufficient budget breakdown, designated no external auditor and set up no binding framework for independent oversight. the rationale of the Cardano Japan Council on the larger listing request
The document behind the revision lists its changes as minor wording improvements, new and more precise definitions, corrected typos, the removal of outdated provisions such as the codes of conduct for DReps and pool operators, and the removal of the budget information action requirement for treasury withdrawals, which it calls unnecessary. It names no author. the document behind the revision
The ceiling in force caps paid withdrawals at ₳350M for the period from the start of epoch 532 to the end of epoch 604. the document behind the ceiling in force
The document behind the committee replacement, authored by Intersect, records the results of an election Intersect hosted from 5 May to 6 July 2025 and states that the interim term was set to end with epoch 580. It lists each of the seven elected members with its cold credential and expiration epoch: the Cardano Atlantic Council, KtorZ, the Cardano Japan Council and Phil_uplc on 73 epoch terms to epoch 653, and Tingvard, the Eastern Cardano Council and Ace Alliance on 146 epoch terms to epoch 726, the candidate ranked highest choosing a term length first. It states that ratification removes the interim members Cardano Foundation, Input Output Global, EMURGO and Intersect, and that the Cardano Atlantic Council, the Eastern Cardano Council and the Cardano Japan Council already sat on the interim committee, the first two keeping their cold credentials while the Cardano Japan Council generated a new credential for the new term, reflecting a change in its membership. the document behind the committee replacement
The document behind the two listing requests, the same text for both, asks for 5,000,000 ada on behalf of the Snek Foundation to secure listings of the SNEK token on centralised exchanges and retail brokers, provide liquidity and market making for its ada pairs, cover legal and compliance costs, and appoint an advisory board to oversee execution. the document behind the larger listing request
The document behind the loan budget, authored by the Snek Foundation and Intersect, asks for 5,000,000 ada as a loan rather than a grant for the same listing plan, sets interest at 2.44% a year, requires repayment to begin no later than the last day of year three and the full balance plus interest to be repaid within five years of disbursement, and names Intersect as the administrator of the funds. the document behind the loan budget
The document behind the regional plan asks for a budget of 778,000 ada for training and mentoring local advocates, a hackathon, meetups, governance workshops and marketing in the region, to be administered by selfdriven Services and released milestone by milestone, with disputes over a milestone open to appeal by an information action put to the DReps. the document behind the regional plan