I do question their use of the term 'community'. I don't think it's inclusive of users, certainly given what was written in the foundation's web page. However, they also mention community in the context of that useless, feel-good, survey they've put out the last few years; which involves users.In short: to be driven by a mindset as open as its sources.
This implies that it finds the justification of its existence outside of itself.
The same as the other members of the BSD family (and as Illumos): each of them is a cocoon and touching any single thread of it, even to make it more comfy or look nicer, is considered a vital risk by its inhabitants. They just want it to stay the same until they die, full stop.
This explains the Git story. On one hand, the CT says they decided to migrate to Git to attract new developers, but on the other hand, as it is complete nonsense, everybody in the FreeBSD community understands this will not happen, so everybody feels safe, nothing is at risk of the slightest change.
The only problem with this is for outsiders: they come in, find great things here and less great ones, they'd like to contribute and they discover they've been deceived by an insincere discourse.
Being familiar with systemics, I understand the situation and feel no resentment, but I've already noticed that some people feel quite sad and bitter about it.
I believe core & the foundation have one main goal, the advancement of their benefactor's goals. To that end smaller/individual financial contributors are contributing to that goal, not one they be more concerned about like wifi, device support, sleep/resume support and so on. In short, I'd like to see targetted donations; but that's in my idealised fantasy world...