Cardano Budget Process Framework (facilitated by Intersect)
7 of 7 committee members voted
- Ace Alliance71aa5b3a…8f04YesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
Ace Alliance finds the proposed “Cardano Budget Process Framework (facilitated by Intersect)” Governance Action Constitutional. Rationales are archived at https://github.com/ace-alliance/ace-voting/
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
This Info Governance Action (gov_action1a95...7g4d2u) proposes a structured framework for the 2026 Cardano budgeting cycle administered by Intersect. Our review confirms that this proposal adheres to the constitutional requirements governing Info Actions. Importantly, under the Cardano Constitution, no single entity holds a monopoly on running a budget process or requesting treasury withdrawals.
Constitutional Alignment
The governance action aligns with the constitutional framework for the following reasons:
- Procedural Requirements (Article II.6): The proposal follows the standardized format, provides sufficient rationale (including a title, abstract, and motivation), and utilizes an immutable
ipfs://anchor link and hash to host off-chain context. - Nature of Info Actions (Appendix I.8): The Constitution explicitly states that Info Actions are not enacted on-chain and that no guardrails are imposed upon them. Using an Info Action to record a proposed community workflow is a valid and permissible use of this mechanism.
- Constitutional Review (Article III.1.4): The Constitutional Committee is authorized to evaluate the constitutionality of actions contemplated within Info Actions. The administrative framework described within the text does not violate any constitutional tenets or provisions.
Due to its adherence to constitutional provisions, this Info Action is Constitutional.
- Procedural Requirements (Article II.6): The proposal follows the standardized format, provides sufficient rationale (including a title, abstract, and motivation), and utilizes an immutable
- Cardano Curia84feba94…6bd5YesActive · term ends epoch 799Rationale
Cardano Curia recommends YES (Constitutional) on this Budget Process Framework Info Action because it records a budgeting procedure without altering protocol parameters, treasury authority, or governance powers, and it may improve transparency and accountability in treasury spending.
What is being proposed
This is a Governance Information Action that records the Intersect Budget Process Framework for the 2026 budgeting year and future cycles (until modified). It describes a five-stage budgeting workflow covering: prerequisites (vision/strategy + metadata + NCL), proposal intake with templates and structured requirements, review/refinement and prioritization, consolidation into Treasury Withdrawal Governance Actions (TWGAs), and execution/monitoring where an Administrator may be selected.
Notable policy choices in the described workflow include a 100,000 ADA minimum request threshold for proposals in the process and a 1,000 ADA treasury donation requirement to enter the Intersect-facilitated intake flow.
Rationale thinking (constitutional assessment)
This proposal constitutes a valid Budget Info Action under the Cardano Constitution v2.4 because it records a procedural framework for ecosystem budgeting without altering protocol rules, treasury authority, or governance powers. The action does not trigger treasury withdrawal guardrails or parameter changes and therefore presents no constitutional conflict.
Evaluated against Tenets 1–10, the framework does not affect transaction performance, costs, interoperability, developer freedom, financial stability, or ADA supply, and it may improve transparency and accountability in treasury spending.
While the proposal introduces policy choices such as a 100,000 ADA minimum proposal threshold and a 1,000 ADA treasury donation requirement, these represent governance design decisions rather than constitutional violations.
Recommendation
YES — Constitutional.
Conclusion: YES — Constitutional. This Info Action records a budgeting procedure and does not alter protocol parameters, treasury authority, or governance powers. It presents no constitutional conflict and may improve transparency and accountability for future Treasury-funded activity execution.
- Cardano Japan Council725d4d44…7b31YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
We consider this governance action to be constitutional.
This proposal is an Info Action documenting the framework of the ecosystem budget process operated by Intersect. Under the Cardano Constitution, an Info Action is defined as an action having no effect beyond on-chain recording, and this proposal remains within that scope. It meets the formal requirements for a Governance Action as stipulated in Article 2, Section 6 (Governance Action Standards) of the Cardano Constitution and is presented via an immutable off-chain document (IPFS). Therefore, we determine that this proposal does not present any clear constitutional violations.
For the reasons stated above, we determine that it is constitutional.
- Phil_uplc68bb0b42…8746YesActive · term ends epoch 799Rationale
- Tingvard646d1b3a…be43YesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
Tingvard judges the “Cardano Budget Process Framework (facilitated by Intersect)” governance action constitutional.
This governance action is correctly submitted as an “Info” action under Article II, §6 and Article III, §1–§4 of the Cardano Constitution. Info actions create an on-chain record and provide information to the governance system but do not themselves enact changes to the protocol, parameters, treasury, or governance structure. The proposal therefore falls within the permissible scope of informational governance actions.This framework contains proposed actions that can affect future treasury withdrawals and therefore falls under Article III, §1, 4
The action satisfies the procedural requirements of Article II, §6. It provides a title, abstract, motivation, rationale, and supporting materials referenced through immutable hashes and URLs. These elements ensure that the off-chain documentation referenced by the governance action is verifiable and cannot be altered after submission, satisfying the constitutional requirement that governance actions provide sufficient context and supporting materials.
The proposal records a structured framework for the Cardano ecosystem budget process. The document outlines a multi-stage process covering strategic preparation, proposal submission, review cycles, prioritization, consolidation into treasury withdrawal actions, and subsequent execution and monitoring. As an Info action, this framework does not itself authorize treasury withdrawals and therefore does not trigger the requirements governing “Treasury Withdrawals” actions in Article II, §7. Instead, it records the procedural approach that may guide future budget cycles and the preparation of subsequent treasury withdrawal proposals.
The framework also recognizes the constitutional guardrails governing treasury withdrawals, including the requirement that withdrawals must not exceed the Net Change Limit (NCL) and must follow the governance processes defined by the Constitution. By explicitly acknowledging the need for an approved NCL and by stating that treasury withdrawal governance actions must follow the applicable constitutional processes, the framework is consistent with the treasury guardrails defined in Appendix I.
This governance action is correctly submitted as an “Info” action under Article II, §6 and Article III, §1–§4 of the Cardano Constitution. Info actions create an on-chain record and provide information to the governance system but do not themselves enact changes to the protocol, parameters, treasury, or governance structure. The proposal therefore falls within the permissible scope of informational governance actions.This framework contains proposed actions that can affect future treasury withdrawals and therefore falls under Article III, §1, 4
The action satisfies the procedural requirements of Article II, §6. It provides a title, abstract, motivation, rationale, and supporting materials referenced through immutable hashes and URLs. These elements ensure that the off-chain documentation referenced by the governance action is verifiable and cannot be altered after submission, satisfying the constitutional requirement that governance actions provide sufficient context and supporting materials.
The proposal records a structured framework for the Cardano ecosystem budget process. The document outlines a multi-stage process covering strategic preparation, proposal submission, review cycles, prioritization, consolidation into treasury withdrawal actions, and subsequent execution and monitoring. As an Info action, this framework does not itself authorize treasury withdrawals and therefore does not trigger the requirements governing “Treasury Withdrawals” actions in Article II, §7. Instead, it records the procedural approach that may guide future budget cycles and the preparation of subsequent treasury withdrawal proposals.
The framework also recognizes the constitutional guardrails governing treasury withdrawals, including the requirement that withdrawals must not exceed the Net Change Limit (NCL) and must follow the governance processes defined by the Constitution. By explicitly acknowledging the need for an approved NCL and by stating that treasury withdrawal governance actions must follow the applicable constitutional processes, the framework is consistent with the treasury guardrails defined in Appendix I.
Finally, the action aligns with the Tenets set forth in Article I. By promoting transparency, structured participation, and predictable governance processes for treasury-funded initiatives, the framework supports the Tenets of decentralization, transparency, and long-term sustainability. Establishing a clear budgeting process improves governance clarity for DReps, vendors, and the wider community, thereby strengthening the ecosystem’s capacity to allocate resources responsibly.Tingvard finds this governance action constitutional. It complies with Article II, §6 and operates within the scope of an informational governance action under Article III. The proposal records a governance framework that may guide future ecosystem budgeting while preserving the constitutional processes required for treasury withdrawals and other binding governance decisions.
- Eastern Cardano Council2ea7a78e…10ecNoActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
We have determined that this Info governance action is unconstitutional.
Article III, Section 1(2) of the Cardano Constitution states "The CC shall be limited to voting on the constitutionality of governance actions, including any proposed or contemplated actions contained within "Info" actions."
The governance action with ID "gov_action1a95...7g4d2u" and title "Cardano Budget Process Framework (facilitated by Intersect)", is an Info governance action, so should be assessed for constitutionality.
The "Motivation" section of this Info governance action states "The Cardano governance system can benefit from a consistent and transparent framework to manage Treasury budgeting. Publishing this information ensures that all governance participants—including proposers, DReps, operational teams, and the wider community—navigate from a shared, authoritative reference."
This implies that all treasury withdrawals should be processed through this framework ("ensures that all governance participants"). While the Cardano on-chain protocol will technically permit someone to bypass this, by formalising it as an Info governance action, DReps will likely reject proposals that do not follow it. We have already seen an example of this, where DReps are appealing to the 2030 Vision Info governance action when rejecting proposals they believe don’t comply with it, rather than rejecting it on its merits.
Article II, Section 1(1) guarantees that no formal membership shall be required to participate in the Cardano Blockchain. While the proposed framework stops short of requiring formal membership, it imposes substantive compliance requirements, mandatory alignment with the 2030 Vision and structured data submissions that function as conditions of participation. A proposer who cannot or will not comply with these requirements will face DRep rejection not on the merits of their proposal, but on procedural non-conformance. This creates a de facto barrier to participation that violates the access guarantee Article II, Section 1(1) is designed to protect.
Further, under "Stage 1, Core Proposal Data Requirements" of this Info governance action it states that "the Budget Template requires vendors to submit structured data in three key areas" that relate to the 2030 vision and strategy.
By mandating certain information be supplied, proposals are not able to be assessed impartially on their merits. Article II, Section 4 vests voting power in DReps. By pre-conditioning proposal eligibility on 2030 Vision alignment, this framework transfers that evaluative authority to the framework designers, constraining DRep discretion in a manner the Constitution does not permit.
However, TENET 9 requires fair and impartial treatment of all users. The framework systematically disadvantages proposers whose work does not align with the 2030 Vision, regardless of its technical merit or community benefit, creating a structurally biased evaluation process.
Due to the constitution misalignments identified above, we find this governance action Unconstitutional.
This governance action breaches tenets or guardrails in the Cardano Constitution, so is deemed unconstitutional.
- KtorZ64f97568…3a49NoExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
I believe that the suggested process is unconstitutional. It is arguable whether the role of the CC covers such an info action, but given that it explicitly refers to a type of governance action (withdrawal), I believe it to be in scope.
I believe that the outlined process is a violation of the entire Article II - Section 1.
Although not being explicitly said (but supported by the given example scenario, and the multiple references to the NCL as a target), the document proposes an Intersect-facilitated budget process as the only process permitting access to the Cardano treasury. Intersect being a member-based organisation, this contradicts the first paragraph which states that "no formal membership shall be required to use, participate in and benefit from the Cardano Blockchain."
Similarly, the suggested process promotes Intersect as the one central authority in matters of budget, thus discouraging any other effort to partake in the governance process. This contradicts the second paragraph which states that "Cardano Community members are encouraged to collaborate [..] to form organizations that support the Cardano Blockchain and the Cardano Community".
Beneath it all, the budget is framed as a "Cardano" budget framework, whereas it is in fact an "Intersect" budget framework.