Tensions inside Cardano’s fledgling on-chain governance framework erupted this week after members of the project’s Technical Steering Committee (TSC) unilaterally filed a far-reaching budget proposal for core infrastructure work, triggering a public rebuke from the Intersect member-based organization that is acting as facilitator of the first-ever Budget Reconciliation Process.
In a post on X, Adam Rusch, a member of Intersect’s board of directors, revealed that “members of the Intersect Technical Steering Committee (TSC) have put forth a proposal outlining their vision of how the Core Infrastructure Maintenance and Delivery process should work,” but did so “not in collaboration with Intersect staff or reconciled with the Board of Directors.”
Cardano Governance Dispute Erupts
Rusch said the authors had already “made plans to tender contracts and select vendors that was not agreed upon by the rest of Intersect,” leaving the board “unable to support the proposal.” He stressed that Delegate Representatives (DReps) must decide whether to back it, adding, “While I truly have the utmost respect for the individuals who have been at the forefront of advancing this proposal, it must be the DReps who decide whether they want to support it or not.”
A statement released by Intersect’s board on 28 April laid bare the dispute. During the multi-week Budget Reconciliation Workshop, two rival funding packages emerged: one from TSC members, titled “Cardano Maintenance and Roadmap Delivery Proposal: Secure Ada Network Infrastructure for the enTire cardano communitY,” and the “2025 Input Output Engineering Core Development Proposal” advanced by Input Output Global’s engineering arm. “These two proposals have substantial overlap in the problems being addressed and solutions being offered, with different approaches from each proposer,” the board wrote.
Although the board acknowledged that the TSC submission “was made in good faith and in an attempt to set good standards,” it concluded that “Intersect, at this stage, is not in a position to fully endorse this proposal as more time is needed to consider how taking on its full scope would affect organizational structure and governance.”
The directors therefore invited the architects to “advance their proposal independently, through a separate organizational structure,” noting that the new entity would “be free to select vendors and identify the RFP processes it plans to use.” Importantly, the statement underscored that the proposal “should not be promoted as coming from the TSC or from Intersect itself.”
The board reminded readers that Intersect’s committees “facilitate, co-ordinate, and recommend, but not control the MBO as a whole,” concluding that “no committee has legal authority to assume obligations on behalf of Intersect. As a corporate entity only the board has the power to enter into contracts in the name of Intersect.”
Intersect Pushes Back
Signed by directors Steven Lupien, Nikhil Joshi, Kavinda Kariyapperuma, Gerard Moroney and Adam Rusch, the statement framed the controversy as a necessary stress-test of Cardano’s new governance machinery: “The most important consideration for the Board of Directors is to have a robust discussion about the future of Cardano’s development and governance, with ADA holders and their Delegate Representatives making the ultimate decisions on how to proceed.”
Reactions were swift. Neil Davies, a system-performance scientist at Input Output HK (IOHK) and a registered DRep, echoed the board’s stance, telling the proposal’s sponsors, “We believe that you were acting in good faith. However, we are not able to support your proposal at this time. You remain free to continue promoting your proposal as independent actors and we will collaborate with your organization if the DReps select you.”
Rusch reiterated the same message verbatim in a follow-up reply, underlining the board’s position that the matter now rests in the hands of the electorate of ADA holders and their delegates.
The clash has exposed fault lines in Cardano’s experiment with decentralized budgeting, where multiple independent bodies—Intersect, its committees, Input Output and community-elected DReps—must converge on a unified spending plan for 2025. While the TSC’s bid for a more autonomous infrastructure program has been sidelined for now, its champions can still campaign directly to DReps, setting up a decisive vote that will test the balance of power between corporate stewardship and community initiative.
Until that vote occurs, Intersect will proceed with its own consolidated budget covering operational and administrator costs, while promising to “serve the community as an administrator of projects and coordinator of activities” regardless of which roadmap ultimately prevails.
At press time, ADA traded at $0.697.
