ZCG Committee Election (December 2023)

We have just published a blog post announcing the opening of nominations for three seats on the Zcash Community Grants Committee.

Three of the current members’ seats are up for election: @ambimorph, @BrunchTime and @aquietinvestor.

Anyone can stand for election (and existing members can stand for re-election). Prospective candidates simply need to nominate themselves by submitting a forum post (ideally five paragraphs or less) in the governance zcg-elections category , announcing their candidacy, and outlining why they believe they should be elected.

The deadline for nominations is 09:00 UTC on Monday 4th December 2023.

We will add a list of candidates to this post, and candidates will be added to the (@ZCG_Candidates) forum group.

We will host a community call with the candidates in mid-December. After the community call, we will open a Helios poll of the Zcash Community Advisory Panel (ZCAP), which will close at the end of December.

All prospective candidates please:

  1. Read this blog post, which contains important information about the election process, the process of becoming a ZCG Committee member (which includes undergoing KYC, and completing a conflict of interest declaration), and
  2. Announce your candidacy by posting in the ZCG Elections category
  3. Reply to this topic with a link to your candidacy announcement. We will add you to the @ZCG_Candidates group, and add a link to all candidacy announcements in this top post in the order received.
  4. All candidates will receive the title “ZCG Candidate” during the duration of the campaign so users can easily identify users that are running.

If potential candidates have any questions about the role or the election process, please post them in this topic. :point_down:

Any questions for the individual candidates should be posted in their individual candidacy topics to avoid everyone asking/answering questions in this thread.


Posting the below as an FYI for those considering running:


wat if ZF didnt pay ZCG members. but ZCG members got paid from ZCG fund itself?
dat wud make way more sense iwo.


I’m confused by the logic here. Being a philanthropic cause by itself doesn’t mean people shouldn’t get paid to do their job. We pay people so they don’t have to dedicate their time elsewhere and can work to help the cause succeed. I can understand the need for belt tightening, but if being a philanthropic cause is the rationale, shouldn’t the same ~60% pay cut be applied to ZF employees as well since ZF is also a philanthropic organization? Are ZF employees also taking a 60% pay cut? If not, I’m disappointed in the double standard being applied here.

To ensure we retain quality candidates to lead ZCG, as well as set up elected committee members for success to sustainably perform their duties, I propose we include in the forthcoming ZCAP election a vote on amending ZIP-1014 to allow the ZCG Dev Fund slice to be used to make up for any loss of compensation from the ZF Dev Fund slice (e.g., $650 comes from ZF, the rest from ZCG). Since it’s not exactly clear how to make sure something gets put to a ZCAP vote, if you are supportive of the above idea, please either like this post, and/or reply with something like “I support adding an option to amend ZIP-1014 to the forthcoming election.” so that it is clear support for this idea exists. I’d look forward to hearing other community members’ thoughts on this.

1 Like

Hello Zcash Community,

I’d like to engage in a conversation about the commitment and dedication that being a part of the Zcash Community Grant (ZCG) committee entails. Serving on the ZCG is not merely a title—it’s a role that requires considerable flexibility and time from its members. We must be prepared to accommodate the demands of this position within our personal and professional lives, which can include participating in multiple calls per week at sometimes inconvenient hours, such as early mornings or late nights. This intense commitment is crucial as it ensures that every member is actively contributing towards advancing Zcash within our global ecosystem.

In recognition of this dedication, I propose that we continue to offer a stipend of $1725 to ZCG members by amending ZIP1014 to allocate this stipend from the ZCG funds. This proposal is not about personal gain; rather, it’s about acknowledging the time and effort that committee members invest in making informed and proactive decisions for Zcash’s future. The stipend is a gesture of appreciation for the sacrifices made by the committee members and serves to attract highly competent individuals to the role, who can contribute significantly to Zcash.

Given the current economic climate, we are faced with difficult decisions, and I hold immense respect for individuals like @Dodger who guide us in these challenging times. I am hopeful about what lies ahead for Zcash and firmly believe that by adequately supporting our committee members, we can foster even greater achievements for the community.

Thank you for considering this initiative. I intend to present a draft amendment to ZIP1014 in the forthcoming days.



I wanted to voice my concern about the cut to the ZCG committee stipend as well.

While I understand that adjustments must be made in times of austerity, and I support all Zcash organizations in taking appropriate action to preserve runway, I think this cut may be too deep and inappropriately placed.

As we have seen ECC has already made deep cuts to what they are contributing to the ecosystem - They have eliminated vital functions including global regulatory work, partnerships, marketing, strategy, technical support, and building any new protocol features, etc. To my knowledge, they are only focused on research and building a wallet and this has left an enormous hole in work for Zcash.

I have worked closely with the committee since I began working on partnership efforts with ZCG. I have found them to be extremely dedicated to their positions and willing to put in the effort above and beyond what is asked of them to ensure success of the program. I believe that ZCG is likely the only organization that can help fill some of the gaps left by ECC and should therefore retain their talented team.

I am concerned that this deep of a cut could disincentivize members to continue their valuable work. The last few elections we have not seen a surplus in folks interested in running and this lower stipend will likely result in little to no momentum in attracting committee members.

I believe that we should strongly consider splitting the cost of stipends between ECC, ZF, and ZCG to evenly distribute the burden, especially since ECC has cut 95% of their commitment to the community and are receiving the same amount of funding. I think it is fair that ZF not shoulder the burden alone in difficult times.

Ultimately, I think this cut will result in a lack of talent for the committee and further harm the progress towards Zcash growth and decentralization. It highlights again how little say the community has in what is funded for the project and where resource allocation is ultimately given.

We need to begin addressing these concerns together holistically as a show of good faith in one another in order demonstrate to the community that we all have the best interest of the project in mind, not the best interest of ourselves in these difficult times (not intending to imply that is what anyone is doing).

I would like to see ZF, ECC and ZCG work together to cover the stipend as is until we weather the storm that is this crypto winter. We are an ecosystem and a community first, we are individual organizations second. Let’s work together to keep our valuable teams build and growing the project!


And therein lies the rub.

ZCG is not an organization. It is a committee of the Zcash Foundation, whose purpose is to approve major grants to independent teams.

To quote Eran @Tromer, principal author of ZIP 1014, and one of the Seven Scientists who created Zcash:

This is why ZIP 1014 emphasizes that priority should be given to grants “that bolster teams with substantial (current or prospective) continual existence, and set them up for long-term success”.

Others have expressed similar concerns in the past so, just over a year ago, I asked the people who were on the committee at the time whether they would continue to serve if there were no stipend.

All but one told me that they would continue to serve if there were no compensation. One person said that they believed it would be better if everything was totally voluntary. Another stated that, in their opinion, ZCG’s sole focus should be reviewing grants, “not doing additional work”.

During conversations with departing committee members, the reasons that have been cited for stepping down from the committee are the inability to apply for grants (due to the conflict of interest policy) and the time commitment. Nobody has cited compensation as a reason for leaving the committee.


Thank you for providing a thoughtful reply and context, it is helpful.

What happens if no one runs and three members vacate their seats? Do we just run with a leaner committee or does ZF pick up the extra work?

1 Like