ZCG’s independence won’t be changed by this at all. Changing to a minority of seats elected once a year by coinholders is unlikely to negatively effect the quality of candidates.
Probably two separate election ballots, but I expect in general the same candidates would run for both. i.e. ZCAP elect the majority seats, and coinholders elect the minority seats.
It might be that some candidates run only on one ballot, or the other.
But can you see how this modest proposal brings both governance minimisation, a balanced leadership class which is subject to perpetual opposition, and increases the overall accountability of the leadership class. (In this case the leadership class being the ZCG committee.)
It’s positively Machiavellian.