This is my personal opinion, but given the current role and position of the ECC within the Zcash ecosystem, it actually makes sense for the ZF board to have, among others, a member from the ECC. Perhaps you disagree, but I’m simply trying to be mindful of the history and context here. That said, all such matters should be subject to legitimate change, although I am not yet familiar with the process of how and for how long the ZF board members are confirmed.
As far as the Governance Panel is concerned, I’ve been told that this was an ad hoc structure open to everyone. Depending on the circumstances, I think such structures could be useful or even necessary for providing venues for public discussion and deliberation. I don’t see why they should be closed to the members of the ECC, an organization that is arguably central to the life and success of the network.
I think most people would agree that, for Zcash to be successful, it is necessary for the ECC, the ZF, and other key stakeholders, including individual community members, to come together and collaborate. This can happen in different ways and places, but the ZF board is obviously one of those, and perhaps a regular Community Governance Panel could be another. As several people in this forum have already mentioned, it is both natural and great that these discussions are happening, and I’m sure they will continue even beyond NU4. Hopefully they will also lead to some good decision-making and increased clarity for the future 
I will reply separately on the voting/polling issue.