Agree with @mikemetagov that the recommendations and an expanded Foundation board are complementary, not competing.
Re @vegayp: I hear you, but a 2027 implementation date is not a reasonable answer to problems that we are all aware of and that are documented and live right now. The current working group structure is not functioning- coordination is breaking down in practice (hence everything that is on the table in this DAO right now), funding is falling through the cracks, and contributors are being left waiting on decisions that have a clear home under no one.
As mentioned, I am committed to engaging with Phase 3 of the retro in good faith, and I also think the best thing I can do right now is keep this proposal moving forward. There does seem to be broad directional support for this, so the question is whether we keep finding reasons to wait (which imo benefits no one).