🗳 Proposal: Adjustment to BAC Election Timing and Term Structure
Anton Arapov
Wed 5 Nov 2025 12:17PM
Public
Seen by 13
The OpenSSL Corporation board proposes adjusting the timing and structure of Business Advisory Committee (BAC) elections to better align with the OpenSSL Corporation’s board terms, improve continuity, and reinforce engagement expectations.
BAC election timing and structure update
proposal by Anton Arapov Closed Tue 11 Nov 2025 1:30PM
The proposal to adjust the timing and structure of Business Advisory Committee (BAC) elections has been adopted.
The first cycle under this structure will begin with the nomination period from January 19 to February 1, 2026, followed by voting from February 2 to February 20, 2026.
New terms will commence in March 2026, with two-year staggered terms ensuring rotation and continuity.
Details
Current situation: BAC members were elected on December 17, 2024, for one-year terms ending in mid-December 2025.
-
Proposed change:
Nomination period: January 19 – February 1, 2026
Voting period: February 2 – February 20, 2026
New terms commence: March 2026
-
Additional updates:
Term length: Extend to two years.
Rotation: Half the members stand for election each cycle. The 2026 group will be chosen by random draw.
Alignment: TAC elections will follow the same schedule starting in 2026.
In-person participation: Attendance at at least one in-person meeting per term is mandatory. Members unable to meet this requirement must resign, allowing their community to appoint a representative who can attend.
Rationale
This change aligns advisory and board cycles (March–February), strengthens coordination, and supports continuity and accountability through overlapping terms and direct participation.
Decision
Do you support adopting this updated BAC election timing and structure?
Results
| Results | Option | Votes | % of votes cast | % of eligible voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 6 | 100 | 100 |
|
| Abstain | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 0 | 0 |
6 of 6 votes cast (100% participation)
Jeff Johnson Wed 5 Nov 2025 2:28PM
I support but would like a chance to grow the LBC for at least another year. :). I want to see that community grow! Just my .02.
Tim Hudson Fri 7 Nov 2025 4:43AM
@Jeff Johnson Nothing would preclude the BAC members from volunteering which three step down and perhaps stand for re-election for Feb 2026 - i.e. if there were three volunteers to end at Feb 2026 then there does not need to be a random draw. But I see all six of you are pretty engaged which is why we assumed a random draw would be the right approach.
Basically we had in mind this sort of model of longer terms and half-rotation each election originally, but we settled on the simple 1 year term as a compromise when starting out. The OpenSSL Foundation does not plan to alter things as you will have seen from their election announcement. We had hoped to stay in alignment in how things are handled, but we definitely see the problem with the current one year term and we did not want to wait another year to address it.
Jeff Johnson Fri 7 Nov 2025 1:37PM
@Tim Hudson Totally understand. I was just expressing my personal desire to see the LBC grow if I could. Thanks!
Jaroslav Reznik · Wed 5 Nov 2025 12:31PM
I like and support the proposal - two years term will give BAC and TAC members more time to get familiar with their roles and make it more useful. Also I agree with the rotation for continuity reasons. It is a challenge to bootstrap the new BAC/TAC from scratch every year/two years (with this proposal).