Notes from the June 2026 Governing Board meeting

The June 2026 Governing Board (GB) call took place on Thursday, 30 June 2026. These are the meeting notes and summary. The delayed publication of the notes is regretted. I’d like to thank Shree for reminding us. The primary discussion topic for the call was 2026 Governing Board elections. Bowrna, Shree, and Swastik were on the call, and Bodhish joined the call a little late, with Ashlesh, Vishal, and Rahul from the Foundation.

Governing Board Elections

1. Rahul started the conversation by reminding the GB members that we discussed the possibility of a few GB members stepping down after 1 year, and a few continuing for a 2-year term, to ensure that elections can be held every year while also maintaining continuity and to ease onboarding of newly elected GB members. Rahul then opened the floor, asking the existing GB members whether any of them considered stepping down this year.
2. Shree stepped up and noted that he would like to not continue. He still intends to be involved with the community, and he believes that his time is better spent volunteering than as a member of the GB. He noted that the GB is slightly ahead of its time and that community development is lagging. He volunteers in multiple places within the FOSS United ecosystem, e.g., Co-chair of IndiaFOSS 2026, and that splitting attention across activities is hurting long-term. Given his experience in the inaugural GB, he also believes that he can hold the GB accountable going forward as a member of the community.
3. Bowrna then noted that after speaking with the Staff, she has a better understanding of the gap between what the staff does at FOSS United and what she knows. She believed that she could help with strategy as a GB member, but she noted that maybe working at the grassroots is where she finds joy.
4. Swastik noted that having just graduated and starting a new job, he has decided to step down and focus on his career. His work requires a fair amount of travel, and he isn’t sure whether he will be able to take the regular calls required of the GB.
5. Bodhi also believes he wasn’t able to add much value and didn’t do justice to the role. He noted that he was open to stepping down, and that new people will want the opportunity to work and contribute via the GB. Bodhish believes that FOSS United can serve as a support system for FOSS projects, especially when they attempt to establish communities and/or organizations. A playbook for sustainable project growth will be invaluable to the broader ecosystem, and FOSS United is uniquely positioned to help create and maintain this playbook. Bodhish and the Open Health Care Project recently went through the process of setting up a Section 8 not-for-profit Foundation in India, and he noted that there were a lot of papercuts involved in this process, and that he’s coming across more folks in the Indian FOSS ecosystem who are facing similar challenges.

Structure and term of GB

1. We also discussed terms for GB members - 2 years or 4 years, with the possibility of stepping down after 1 year in both cases.
2. Bodhish noted that it’s very hard to work on non-profits while working full-time, so it’s good to maybe have 4-year terms with the possibility of moving on after 1 year.
3. Shree, on the other hand, noted that he prefers 2 year terms, with the choice of stepping down after 1 year. He noted that 4 years is a long-time, especially in the AI age and the turmoil that the FOSS ecosystem is going through. Shree also noted that 4 years is a long commitment, which might put off people from even running for the GB in the first place.
4. Bowrna noted that 1 year seems very short, and that it takes time to understand what the GB does and what the GB is capable of. 10-15 calls per year, roughly one per month, means that the learning curve is steep and the progress can be slow.
5. In the end, we agreed that Governing Board members are elected for a 2 year term, and they can choose to step down after 1 year. Governing Board members can be re-elected after their 2-year term, but they can only serve for a maximum of two contiguous terms.
6. Vishal noted that the FOSS United Foundation is different now compared to even one year ago, and that maybe next year the GB members are able to see the change they are working towards. The first year helps GB members understand, and the second year helps them “deliver” and “lead”. With 1 or 2 members elected every year, starting 2026, not everyone in the GB will be starting from scratch, and they have earlier GB members to rely upon for advice, guidance, and institutional memory.

Logistics of Elections

Regarding who can run for the GB,

1. Shree noted that it will still be useful to have at least one student represented in the GB.
2. Bodhish doubled down on the need for senior folks, with significant experience in the FOSS/Digital Commons ecosystems, and have the long-term success of the Foundation in their mind. He also warned about the possibility of gaming community elections like that of FOSS United.
3. Vishal also noted that experience is necessary to ensure that GB members are able to bring new and pragmatic ideas to the table. It’s worth noting that experience and age aren’t the same thing, especially given that we run into college students with 4 or more years of FOSS contribution experience.
4. But Shree also noted that most college students understand how drastic the transition from college to a working environment can be, and therefore have difficulty actually living up to the expectations of GB members.

Finally, we discussed the election process itself.

1. The tech we used for the previous election was universally dismissed - noting that people weren’t even aware of everyone on the ballot, because of bad UX. The situation was especially worse on mobile devices.
2. The previous platform might have also unfortunately filtered out people who might have been ideal for the GB due to bad UX.
3. Everyone also noted that anyone who is running for the election should be a regular member of the Indian FOSS community, and that FOSS United should consider engaging with them even after the elections are over.
4. Our next steps involve putting together a timeline for the elections, creating a template for community members to submit nominations, and deciding on a platform for nominations and for the election itself.

Miscellaneous

1. Finally, unrelated to the elections, Shree asked about the status of the Annual report, and Swastik asked when the financial plan for FY 2026-27 would be published online. Shree also noted that the messaging on the website doesn’t pull in volunteers. Our grants work also feels too software-focused, and that we aren’t making it clear the breadth of domains that we support via our grants.