This AI-generated summary covers xGov Council meetings, which are unofficial and independently organized by the council. It offers a transparent view of their work and initiatives of xGov council to enhance the xGov program. These notes are provided as-is, and it’s to be understood that some topics may not be fully clear without prior context.
~3 minute read
xGov Council & AF Meeting – (May 13th, 2026) 
Attendees: xGov Council members & Algorand Foundation representatives
Overview
The meeting covered treasury funding status, committee automation, proposed T&C changes, the upcoming council election, and the council note process failure. No formal votes were taken.
Key Topics Discussed
1. Node Reward Treasury Funding & Top-Up
The node rewards proposal has passed internal review and is now with the Foundation’s legal team, with a decision expected within one to two weeks.
- The treasury is currently ~200–300k ALGO in deficit accounting for expected passing proposals.
- Plan: a short-term top-up to cover immediate payouts, followed by a larger compensatory top-up for the quarter the new structure wasn’t yet live, after which staking rewards sustain the treasury on an ongoing basis.
- Council to send precise payout obligations to the Foundation by email after the call.
2. Committee Automation
Committee generation at the milestone block is now fully automated and hosted independently of the frontend.
- A verification repository is publicly available to audit committee generation artifacts.
- A watchdog hard cutoff prevents stale committees from persisting if automation fails.
- New code paths are live for the first time — no issues anticipated but flagged for awareness.
3. Terms & Conditions — Proposed Changes
The council presented the formal T&C proposal document and walked through it together with Foundation representatives on the call. Two areas were covered: open-sourcing after approval, and council member code of conduct. Both received broad support from Foundation attendees and will be sent for legal processing.
Open-Sourcing After Approval: Recent proposal batches highlighted the need to more formally define the rules around this route. Key points:
- Minimum ask threshold set at 300,000 ALGO (75% of the maximum ask) — proposals below this must commit to open-sourcing upfront.
- A council sponsorship (chaperone) requirement was agreed: a council member must actively vouch for the proposal and commit to ensuring deliverables are delivered as promised.
- All proposal communications must go through the forum or official Discord — private messages carry no weight in the process.
Council Code of Conduct: A set of rules was introduced to ensure integrity of the process when council members seek xGov funding themselves. Key points:
- Conflicted council members must abstain from the preliminary TNC assessment in the Council Note for their own proposal.
- Conflicted council members must also abstain from the personal support section of the Council Note.
- Conflicted council members must abstain from the final confirmation vote. In the event of a deadlock among the remaining non-conflicted members, a tiebreaker provision applies.
4. Council Elections
The Foundation is targeting mid-July 2026 for the next election, with a voting architecture decision expected by end of that week.
- The council was invited to propose improvements to the election process — size, term length, compensation, KYC requirements, and incumbent re-application rules.
- Council flagged that compensation must increase meaningfully for the next term, given the workload significantly exceeded original expectations and if qualified experts are to be attracted to participate in future elections.
- Mandatory public doxxing was noted as a participation barrier; private verification to the Foundation was suggested as a minimum.
- Council member performance evaluation was discussed. On-chain TNC votes alone are insufficient as a metric — the smart contract stops recording once quorum is reached, and most council work happens off-chain (forum activity, code reviews, meeting participation). Self-reporting by candidates at election time was suggested as a pragmatic way for voters to assess incumbent track records.
- A written proposal from the council on election structure to be prepared within two weeks, with a follow-up session to be arranged.
Outcomes and Next Steps
- Council to send precise treasury payout obligations to the Foundation by email.
- Foundation to update on legal review of node rewards proposal when resolved.
- Council to finalise the open-sourcing threshold and send updated T&C document to Foundation for legal processing.
- Council to prepare election structure proposal document within two weeks.
- Follow-up session to be scheduled within two weeks for election planning.
- Council to send Council Notes via email going forward for timely posting.
- Foundation to investigate requiring all council votes to be cast regardless of quorum, as part of next council contract design.
- Meeting time slot confirmed and fixed going forward.
Also Discussed
- Proposal parameters — minimum fee and minimum ask are registry-level config changes requiring no platform halt; the council flagged this as a potential future request.
- Development roadmap — no committed xGov feature development in the near term; a broader xGov site initiative is underway but not ready to share.
- Proposer documentation — council requested the Foundation update onboarding docs to outline the recommended pre-submission flow: preliminary discussion on the forum should happen before a proposal is officially created.
- Council Note process — notes were not published in the last batch due to a communication gap; going forward the council will also send notes via email for timely posting.
- Folks Finance NTT proposal — a public statement on prior Foundation funding of wormhole-related work is expected imminently; the Foundation has released the Folks Finance team from their NDA regarding this matter.
- Council compensation (current term) — payment is made at end of term, which also serves as a safeguard — allowing the council to remove and slash compensation of any malicious or non-performing member before payment is due.
Note: A brief council-only discussion took place after Foundation representatives left the call; that portion is not included in this summary.