At least some of the Board members who are proposing this move are people who I wouldn't exactly consider politically neutral (although, to be clear, they have made great contributions to the project, and I don't mean to diss them or anything). I think Wales is more centrist than they are if anything, although he does have a slight Objectivist slant.
I'm not sure political bias in Wikimedia governance is actually a problem though. The Wikimedia movement doesn't claim to be neutral, it has a normative mission to support free knowledge, and has pushed for certain political goals in the past (e.g., the SOPA blackout, suing the NSA, supporting human rights activists in authoritarian countries, and politically titled editathons like Art+Feminism/WikiLovesPride, all of which I personally agree with btw). Article content itself should be neutral, but that's a separate matter from governance. Everyone comes to the project with their own biases and there's no such thing as a "neutral person", but we aim to put those biases aside when editing content. (At least on Wikipedia; some smaller sister projects like Wikiversity don't have "neutral point of view" policies.)
I'm not sure political bias in Wikimedia governance is actually a problem though. The Wikimedia movement doesn't claim to be neutral, it has a normative mission to support free knowledge, and has pushed for certain political goals in the past (e.g., the SOPA blackout, suing the NSA, supporting human rights activists in authoritarian countries, and politically titled editathons like Art+Feminism/WikiLovesPride, all of which I personally agree with btw). Article content itself should be neutral, but that's a separate matter from governance. Everyone comes to the project with their own biases and there's no such thing as a "neutral person", but we aim to put those biases aside when editing content. (At least on Wikipedia; some smaller sister projects like Wikiversity don't have "neutral point of view" policies.)
reply