Hi @Martin,
I have given more thought on the Governance and I guess it is fine to have some Advisory concepts even about funding in it.
The main thing is that transparency stays high. And I guess one way would be indeed to be transparent about things and the OpenRefine Governance is a good place for some of that, even though some elements of the Governance current draft do not 100% pertain to OpenRefine itself, and I gratefully acknowledge that the Advisory is a part of the community that appropriates funds into OpenRefine and it's community "at times". In light of that, I think it would be OK to be transparent about that in the OpenRefine Governance, and maybe it could be worded more like that...pulling out details that only pertain to Advisory Governance, and leaving in the OpenRefine Governance and it's funding abilities and oversight of funding with Advisory Committee and CS&S. For instance, listing who is part of the Advisory Committee could actually be considered Advisory concerns only, and not OpenRefine concerns, i.e. We don't put in details about other community groups in our Governance, and so there's that analogy to help you think the way I do. Advisory concerns only could be removed and placed in Advisory documents. Things like that.
Thanks for listening!
Thad