RRC-XX-R: Treasury Structural Alignment for the Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF)

coffee-crusher · October 11, 2025, 8:53pm

RRC-XX: Treasury Structural Alignment for the Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF)

Author: coffee-crusher

Abstract

This proposal serves as a crucial housekeeping measure to streamline the DAO’s financial commitments and ensure maximum capital efficiency, aligning resources with the new structure established by the Treasury Management Empowerment Program (RRC-51). It formally establishes the Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF) and integrates the equivalent historical annual RARI token value of an optimized budget item to seed the new fund. This alignment ensures financial clarity, fully supporting the core objectives of RRC-51. The CSGF will be funded with RARI tokens to support key community initiatives.

Motivation

The RARI DAO has just completed a major governance shift by implementing the Treasury Management Empowerment Program (RRC-51), establishing a more agile and proactive financial model. To enable the Foundation to fully utilize this new structure with maximum clarity and operational efficiency, this proactive structural alignment is required to ensure clarity for the 2026 fiscal year.

This proposal serves as a necessary proactive measure to:

Enhance RRC-51 Success: By proactively completing this structural housekeeping now, we ensure the new RRC-51 financial framework begins with maximum clarity, enabling the Foundation to seamlessly execute its new mandate.
Optimize Budget Clarity: The resolution regarding this general operational, fixed annual cost serves to streamline the baseline requirements for the Foundation’s upcoming 2026 budget submission, reflecting the DAO’s new, merit-based governance focus, demonstrating responsible and forward-thinking financial stewardship.
Resource Alignment: The transitioning resources create a dedicated, community-governed resource pool (CSGF) for future ecosystem growth, aligning capital deployment with the community’s highest-priority strategic goals.

Rationale & Benefits

This measure aligns perfectly with the established goals of improved efficiency and strategic clarity that underpinned the successful passage of RRC-51. By confirming this transition now, we provide clarity and constructive support to the Foundation and the community:

Proactive Support: The DAO is actively performing the necessary housekeeping to ensure the Foundation’s 2026 budget submission is unburdened and focused on the new treasury management mandate.
Fiscal Evolution: This measure formally re-aligns a resource allocation, moving it from a general operational budget item to a dedicated, RARI token-denominated strategic fund (CSGF) that is optimized to maximize future ecosystem growth.
Community Empowerment: The CSGF is established as a resource pool available to fund key initiatives that require direct RARI token governance allocation, reinforcing the DAO’s long-term strategic oversight function.
Agile Governance Timeline: This action ensures the financial structure is immediately ready to support subsequent governance actions and preserve strategic momentum.

Specifications

Upon passage, this proposal will enact the following changes: the establishment of the CSGF is immediately effective, and the financial mandates take effect for the 2026 fiscal year:

Formal Establishment of the Community Strategic Growth (CSGF):

The CSGF is formally established as a dedicated fund for strategic ecosystem growth initiatives. The Foundation will execute fund transfers via its multi-sig wallet, supporting the DAO’s strategic direction, and the DAO retains governance authority over all spending decisions.

2026 Budget Category Redirection:

The DAO hereby resolves that the funding allocation previously designated for the legacy fixed-cost general governance and advisory services is permanently designated for the new CSGF and shall therefore not be included in the 2026 Operational Budget Proposal’s core operational lines.
Note: This proposal does not affect the DAO’s Delegate Incentive Program or existing delegate RARI allocations. It also does not affect any existing agreements or funding allocations for the remainder of the 2025 fiscal year (October through December 2025).

Initial CSGF Seeding:

The previously designated annual DAO budget allocation for 2026 will be re-allocated in RARI tokens from the DAO Treasury (managed via Tally v1) to the new CSGF multi-sig wallet, which will be overseen by DAO governance. This action implements the spirit of RRC-51 by exercising strategic financial oversight. The RARI token calculation will use the 30-day Volume-Weighted Average Price (VWAP) (as of the day of the Tally submission) to ensure financial rigor and stability in the fund’s initial seeding.

Financial Classification and Governance Integrity:

The RARI DAO affirms its commitment to transparent treasury management by establishing this resolution as the definitive and binding classification for the 2026 budgetary cycle. Accordingly, any subsequent proposal or financial line item seeking to utilize the funds designated for the new CSGF (e.g., any spending intended for services functionally redundant to the original legacy governance and advisory services) must be administratively classified under the CSGF and requires CSGF governance approval, thereby reflecting the DAO’s official, executed transfer of those funds.

Budgetary Integrity Clause (Legacy Function Authority):

To prevent the creation of redundant spending authority, and to ensure the most efficient use of DAO assets per RRC-51, the execution of the CSGF’s initial VWAP seeding is expressly conditional on the simultaneous and permanent revocation of any existing DAO resolution, contract authority, or budgetary line item that delegates or authorizes funds for the equivalent function of community ecosystem service provision and development.

Overall Cost

The net cost of this proposal to the RARI DAO Treasury is Zero (0). This proposal represents a financial restructuring, optimizing a pre-existing resource by dedicating it to the newly established Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF). No new funds are requested from the Treasury.

Implementation Steps

Upon DAO approval, the Foundation is instructed to perform the following steps:

CSGF Multi-sig Establishment: The Foundation shall establish a new, dedicated Gnosis Safe multi-sig wallet for the CSGF.
Treasury Transfer Execution: The Foundation will submit the proposal’s executable code to the DAO’s Tally v2 platform. Upon successful execution, the required RARI tokens will be transferred from the DAO’s Tally v1 treasury to the newly established CSGF multi-sig wallet.
Governance Designation: The DAO’s governance process (i.e., through future RRCs) is the sole authority for utilizing the funds held in the CSGF.

Timeline

The proposed timeline for this governance action is as follows:

14-Day Forum Discussion: To allow delegates to refine the proposal, reach consensus, and ensure maximum clarity for the Tally vote.
5-Day Tally Vote: Standard voting period on the Tally platform.
2-Day Execution Delay: Standard cooling-off period before execution.

jarisjames · October 11, 2025, 9:38pm

This proposal raises interesting points about community spending. Perhaps the intent here doesn’t need to be a proposal at all, and just a suggestion to the Foundation concerning the old “governance and advisory” budget. This line item may not be relevant anymore, now that the Foundation has financial autonomy though.

sohobiit · October 14, 2025, 1:55pm

RM @coffee-crusher

I understand the guiding line of this proposal and appreciate the direction it’s taking, especially in terms of efficiency and alignment with RRC-51. However, I believe proposals like this should be more grounded in certain operational aspects, particularly regarding the multisig. It would be helpful to clearly define how many signers are being considered, what happens if one steps down, and to establish concrete governance guidelines, since this wallet will safeguard a significant portion of the treasury. It would also be useful to clarify whether the proposed signers will come from the delegates, the RARI Foundation, or a mix of both.

There are several open questions that remain to be addressed, but I appreciate the proposal, which I see as having a promising future for strengthening both the ecosystem and treasury management.

coffee-crusher · October 15, 2025, 12:08am

Thank you so much, @sohobiit , I really appreciate your fantastic questions on the CSGF multi-sig structure, and I truly appreciate your focus on security and operational continuity; it shows a deep understanding of the nuance required for effective governance and RRC-51 implementation.

The key points you’ve raised, signer count, composition (delegate/Foundation mix), and succession are absolutely vital. However, their exclusion from this proposal are intentional, as it reflects a commitment to agile governance and clear process design.

The primary purpose of this proposal is to perform the necessary financial housekeeping to irrevocably align the 2026 budget with the goals of RRC-51. My focus in this RRC is to establish the financial structure that provides the DAO with immediate clarity for the 2026 budget cycle.

The CSGF is established as a new, strategic resource pool that moves capital control from a fixed operational cost to direct DAO oversight. While I acknowledge the Foundation manages existing administrative multi-sigs (like the 3/5 standard for incentive payments), the CSGF is a DAO-governed strategic fund. Therefore, the decision on who holds the keys and how that security is structured is the community’s right to decide. That choice shouldn’t be dictated by this financial resolution; it needs a full, dedicated debate by the delegates in a separate RRC.

Prioritizing this financial structure now gives the Foundation the clearest possible guidance for its 2026 budget submission. Addressing the multi-sig mechanics separately simply ensures that this essential financial alignment proceeds without unnecessary delay, allowing the DAO to secure the funds first and then focus completely on designing the optimal operational custodianship.

This phased approach guarantees that we secure the funding efficiently, uphold the principle of DAO control, and support the Foundation’s ability to plan proactively. The necessary multi-sig and Operational Plan will be drafted as a supporting RRC to be prioritized by the DAO immediately after the passage of this financial resolution.

Kaf_StableLab · October 15, 2025, 12:58pm

Thanks @coffee-crusher and thanks @sohobiit for surfacing important angles.

I’m aligned with the idea of keeping this RRC focused on financial alignment. To help delegates get a full systems view (DAO ↔ Foundation ↔ CSGF) before funds move, could we clarify three points:

Scope & boundary map. Can we see a brief delineation of what remains under the Foundation’s 2026 OPEX vs. what must route through the CSGF (e.g., governance/advisory, community growth, research)? A one-pager taxonomy would prevent overlap and double-charging.
Transition & continuity. Until the CSGF multisig and process are live, who holds interim custody and who executes ongoing community/governance support work already budgeted in 2025? A short continuity clause would avoid a “nobody-can-sign” moment on Jan 1, 2026.
Operational readiness pack (companion). Alongside this RRC (or attached as an appendix), could we share: (a) proposed multisig size & composition + replacement rules, (b) submission/review/approval flow with expected timelines, and (c) asset policy (RARI→stable conversion rules and risk limits)?

Happy to support once these are visible, as they keep us consistent with RRC-51’s goal: decentralization that improves agility and accountability rather than fragmenting them.

coffee-crusher · October 15, 2025, 8:24pm

Thank you so much, @Kaf_StableLab for raising these excellent points. I really appreciate the focus on operational clarity and risk mitigation, that’s exactly what ensures this transition improves agility and accountability, rather than fragmenting it.

I completely agree that delegates need a full systems view before the funds move. I’m going to put together a dedicated Operational Readiness Appendix that formally details all three of your concerns, and I’ll commit to publishing that by Saturday, October 18th.

For now, let me provide the strategic answers:

Regarding the Scope & Boundary Map, the financial firewall is strict. The CSGF is solely for funding new, high-impact growth initiatives approved via a DAO Vote. The Foundation’s 2026 OPEX will be strictly limited to core administrative overhead and compliance, we are specifically moving discretionary spending for items like governance/advisory, community growth, and research into the DAO-controlled CSGF.

On Transition & Continuity, we certainly need a continuity clause to prevent a gap. Existing 2025 Foundation budgets for community and governance support will be allowed to execute until February 1, 2026, or until the first major CSGF-funded program goes live, whichever comes first. This gives us a safe buffer for the new process to be fully established.

Finally, for the Operational Readiness Pack, this proposal sets the mandate, and the dedicated execution proposal will detail the custody. The initial CSGF Grant Execution multi-sig will be a 3/5 with Foundation designated signers (KYC’d for efficiency), and its authority is strictly limited to executing the lump-sum transfer upon DAO approval. Critically, all subsequent spending from the fund must be approved via a formal DAO RRC/Vote. The initial funds will remain in the approved stable asset.

I’m confident the Appendix will give you the full systems view you’re looking for. I really appreciate your detailed review of this proposal.

sohobiit · October 15, 2025, 9:18pm

Thank you @coffee-crusher for this thoughtful and well-structured proposal. It accurately reflects the level of maturity we’ve reached as a DAO and are continuing to mature as delegates. I greatly appreciate the clarity of your explanation and the strategic reasoning that justifies prioritizing the financial framework; it makes perfect sense to secure this foundation before delving into the operational details and whether multisig is phased in. I think that’s great.

I understand that everything related to multisig will be addressed in a separate thread, and I agree that transparent and thorough communication with those interested in joining multisig will be essential to ensure security and continuity. I would like to express my interest in participating in that discussion and contributing to the next phase of this process, as well as being part of multisig.

coffee-crusher · October 15, 2025, 9:47pm

Thank you so much, @sohobiit for this thoughtful and deeply supportive feedback! It’s encouraging to see the community recognize this as a necessary step for the DAO’s maturity, and I appreciate your strategic agreement that we must secure the financial framework first before moving to operational design.

Your interest in participating in the next phase of the process and contributing as a potential multi-sig signer is exactly the kind of dedicated delegate involvement we need for these new structures to be successful. I will reach out directly to all interested parties once the current proposal concludes and we pivot to detailing the fund execution mechanism.

Your support means a lot, thk u!

Jaf · October 15, 2025, 10:37pm

hi @coffee-crusher I have a question:

Who actually decides what counts as “strategic growth” vs. just regular ops, and what happens if teams start mixing the two?

We need to make sure this new setup isn’t just moving the same spending around under a different name.

coffee-crusher · October 15, 2025, 11:05pm

Thanks @Jaf for raising a really crucial question about the guardrails. This concern over governance clarity is exactly the purpose of this proposal.

The process is intentionally designed to remove subjective judgment by placing the authority for all Strategic Growth decisions squarely on the DAO structure itself.

The system works by shifting the power of definition away from the Foundation and onto the community’s vote:

The Foundation simply cannot label something as ‘Strategic Growth’ to fund it. Any initiative drawing from the CSGF must first be approved by a dedicated DAO RRC/Vote. The only definition that matters is the one the community ratifies.

Core Admin (Foundation OPEX) covers only passive maintenance (audits, compliance, basic network stability). Strategic Growth (CSGF) covers new, active, growth-oriented initiatives. If an existing admin team wants to start a new project, they must follow the same process as any new team: submit a proposal, define the scope, and secure a DAO Vote for CSGF funding. Without that vote, the spending is simply unauthorized.

I’ll fully detailed the accountability mechanisms and the strict financial firewall in the Operational readiness appendix that will be shared later this week. I’m confident that appendix will give you all the assurance you need that this system is robust and prevents mission creep. Thanks for the great question!

GozmanGonzalez4 · October 16, 2025, 7:13pm

Thanks for putting this together, @coffee-crusher. This proposal feels like one of those important but often overlooked steps that actually keep the DAO running smoothly. It’s good to see a focus on cleaning up the treasury structure and making sure we go into 2026 with better clarity after RRC-51.

I really like the idea of setting up the Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF) as a dedicated pool for ecosystem initiatives, it gives the community a clearer path for funding meaningful projects without mixing things up with the Foundation’s operational budget. The fact that it doesn’t add new costs but instead restructures existing resources makes it feel like a responsible, forward-thinking move.

A few questions came to mind while reading through this:

How will the community be able to propose or access funding from the new CSGF — will it follow a similar RRC process or something more lightweight?

Will there be regular transparency reports or dashboards showing how CSGF funds are being used?

And finally, are there any early thoughts on what types of initiatives the DAO might prioritize once the fund is live?

Overall, I think this kind of structural housekeeping is exactly what helps us mature as a DAO. It’s less flashy than new incentive programs, but it builds the foundation for long-term sustainability and real community impact.

coffee-crusher · October 17, 2025, 12:03am

Thank you so much for this great feedback, @GozmanGonzalez4 . It’s genuinely great to hear you frame this as “structural housekeeping” that builds the foundation for long-term impact, that’s exactly the spirit behind the proposal. I really appreciate your perspective here.

I can certainly address your questions, and I appreciate you looking ahead to how we’ll put these new structures to work:

First, on proposing and accessing funding from the CSGF, the process will definitely continue to rely on the DAO’s formal governance. Any initiative seeking funding will require a proposal that goes through the full RRC process (discussion, review, and final vote) for approval. We need to ensure that the DAO remains the sole authority over spending from this new strategic asset.

Second, regarding transparency reports, absolutely. The RRC that handles the fund’s subsequent execution (the spending side) will include clear mandates for accountability. This will definitely include regular public reporting on fund usage, budget status, and impact metrics to ensure full transparency for the community.

Finally, on early thoughts for prioritization, this proposal is focused solely on setting the financial foundation. However, the intent of the CSGF is to enable major, scalable initiatives like new contributor programs or key ecosystem development projects that require a long-term budget runway. The community will determine the specific priorities, but our focus is on ensuring the funds are ready for impactful, forward-looking work once the DAO votes to launch a program.

Thanks again for seeing the long-term value in this structural change, and your questions were great and I really appreciate your support and impute! Tk u!

coffee-crusher · October 17, 2025, 11:13pm

Thanks again to @Kaf_StableLab and everyone else for asking for this level of detail. I completely agree that transparency on the operational side is non-negotiable for a proposal like this. I’m happy to get this appendix out today, ahead of my commitment for Saturday.

This provides the full systems view you requested, covering the financial firewall, continuity planning, and the custody structure for the initial fund execution.

The core goal here is establishing a strict financial firewall. This ensures we never double-charge for services and that all future strategic growth spending must come via a DAO-approved RRC. The Foundation’s 2026 OPEX will be strictly for core maintenance and compliance.

Here is the boundary map for clarity:

Service Category	Funding Source	Purpose & Mandate
Core Administration	Foundation 2026 OPEX	Essential Legal & Compliance, Annual Audits, Core Treasury Operations, Non-discretionary Maintenance.
Strategic Growth	CSGF (DAO RRC/Vote)	New Contributor Programs, Strategic Research, Governance Incentives, Community Expansion.

For Transition and Continuity, we need a simple bridge. The Foundation will retain custody of current 2025 budgets for existing community support work. These existing budgets will be allowed to execute until February 1, 2026, or until the first major CSGF-funded program is fully live, whichever comes first. This gives us a safe two-month buffer to prevent any operational gaps.

Finally, on the Operational Readiness and custody flow, the execution of any DAO-approved fund transfers will use a dedicated CSGF Grant Execution multi-sig wallet.

Component	Detail
Size & Quorum	A 3/5 quorum.
Composition	Five KYC’d Foundation signers drawn from the Foundation’s existing roster of multi-sig personnel. This composition ensures maximum administrative efficiency and compliance for all RRC-mandated fund execution tasks.
Authority	The multi-sig’s authority is strictly limited to executing DAO-approved fund transfers for CSGF programs. It serves purely as a mandated execution mechanism for this RRC and holds no standing security, discretionary, or spending authority over the funds once transferred.

In terms of flow, DAO control over the funds remains absolute. All subsequent spending from the CSGF must be approved via a formal, dedicated DAO RRC/Vote that includes a detailed spending mandate. Funds will then be transferred to a mechanism designated in the subsequent RRC for execution, which will be subject to the standard DAO accountability and transparency requirements. The initial funding will remain in the DAO-approved reserve currency to protect the funding runway, consistent with RRC-51.

coffee-crusher · October 22, 2025, 8:41pm

Thank you to all the delegates who have already provided feedback, it is greatly appreciated for your thoughts and insights to help shape this proposal. I also encourage all to continue to provide feedback and comments. The next step is for this proposal to go forward onto Tally v2 on Sunday, October 26th. I’ll update this forum post with an announcement once the Tally vote goes live.

Anria · October 22, 2025, 9:44pm

Thank you for the proposal @coffee-crusher. While the intent of RRC-XX to streamline treasury structures is appreciated, this proposal introduces redundancies and conflicts with the framework already established under RRC-51 (Treasury Management Empowerment Program).

Under RRC-51, the DAO delegated treasury management and strategic allocation responsibilities to the RARI Foundation, including the ability to deploy funds toward strategic partnerships and ecosystem growth initiatives.
Creating a new “Community Strategic Growth Fund” directly overlaps with — and potentially undermines — the Foundation’s newly established mandate. The DAO only recently consolidated treasury operations to eliminate fragmentation; re-introducing an additional fund contradicts this goal.

Additionally, we already have an established Strategic Partnerships allocation and multi-sig wallet, specifically designed for partnership-related expenditures.
Establishing another wallet under a different name (CSGF) for similar purposes adds unnecessary operational and accounting complexity without providing a clear functional distinction. This duplication risks confusion in future financial reporting, oversight, and execution.

Moreover, the DAO retains full governance control over the RARI Chain Treasury, which can already fund any community or partnership initiatives through the existing Tally-based process. If strategic opportunities arise that warrant DAO-level funding, they can be proposed, discussed, and approved directly — without the need for another dedicated fund.

RRC-51 was designed to simplify treasury operations, and this new proposal reintroduces complexity by fragmenting resources again and creating a parallel approval and reporting structure — the very inefficiency RRC-51 sought to remove.

coffee-crusher · October 22, 2025, 11:22pm

Thank you so much, @Anria for providing this important feedback. Your point about adhering to RRC-51’s goal of avoiding fragmentation is essential, and I completely agree that we must maintain operational clarity.

I believe the Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF) is not intended to be a redundant fund, but rather a structural enhancement that facilitates the success of the Foundation’s own RRC-51 mandate:

The Foundation’s role under RRC-51 is rightly focused on Treasury Management, Operational Budget execution, and Strategic Partnerships. These functions deal with administrative, custodial, and external entity risk.

The CSGF is established for a distinct, internal purpose: to fund DAO-governed programs for decentralized governance and community contributor development.

This structural separation provides the Foundation with a clear advantage for governance success:

Providing a Clear Firewall: It removes ambiguity about where the governance authority lies. The CSGF budget cannot be commingled with, or administratively allocated to, operational or partnership expenses, thereby streamlining the Foundation’s accounting and reporting mandates under RRC-51.
Protecting Decentralization Mandates: It ensures that funds dedicated to increasing governance power and internal community health are always subject to direct DAO approval, safeguarding the integrity of these critical programs.

The CSGF, therefore, is the dedicated fund for strategic governance decentralization, which complements the Foundation’s mandate by clearly defining the boundaries of DAO control. This clarity is the best way to ensure both operational efficiency and governance integrity, directly contributing to the long-term success of RRC-51.

Anria · October 23, 2025, 7:58pm

Thank you @coffee-crusher! Appreciate your answer. The intent behind this proposal is understood, but establishing the Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF) is redundant and contradicts the structure that was just approved under RRC-51.

Under RRC-51, the RARI Foundation was empowered to manage treasury operations specifically to enable timely and efficient execution while avoiding the kind of fragmentation this proposal reintroduces. The Strategic Partnership fund and wallet were already created before for this exact purpose. Moving this function elsewhere only duplicates existing processes and undermines the unified treasury model.

As for the point on DAO-governed programs and community contributor development, these can already be proposed and funded through the Rari Chain DAO treasury or, if appropriate, through the funds pool currently managed under the Foundation mandate. Both paths ensure transparency and DAO governance oversight without creating additional structural layers.

The main goal of RRC-51 was to **consolidate resources and streamline execution for treasury and partnership operations. Creating a separate CSGF fund would reverse that progress and add unnecessary complexity to reporting and governance processes.

coffee-crusher · October 24, 2025, 12:22am

Thank you again, @Anria for your continued engagement and for emphasizing the importance of administrative efficiency in RRC-51. That is a core principle I completely share, and it’s precisely why I am proposing a structure that delivers both efficiency and the highest standard of financial clarity.

I also deeply appreciate your leadership in executing the Foundation’s critical support for the DAO, and I acknowledge the Foundation’s continued success in managing the RARI Ecosystem Growth Fund (RRC-12). My goal with this proposal is to support and enhance that work by establishing a superior financial framework for a distinct function, one that makes your execution of community directives as easy, efficient, and compliant as possible. The creation of a dedicated, ring-fenced Community Strategic Growth Fund (CSGF) is not about adding complexity; it’s about giving the Foundation an institutional, best-in-class tool for financial confidence and accountability.

The core benefit of the CSGF is that it acts as a financial firewall that supports the Foundation and the DAO in upholding institutional best practices and building public trust.

It Enhances the Foundation’s Integrity: The Foundation currently manages its operational budget, which is dedicated to administrative and functional responsibilities. The CSGF structure is designed to help the Foundation maintain its rigorous standards, ensuring the funds dedicated to any core community-driven program are clearly and distinctly separated from these day-to-day operational pools. This separation eliminates any possibility of administrative or financial blurring, which is a hallmark of excellent organizational hygiene.
It Strengthens the Foundation’s RRC-51 Role: By clearly and solely dedicating the CSGF to DAO-mandated growth initiatives, this proposal will provide the Foundation’s executive team with the operational clarity and focus they need to succeed. This structure allows them to fully leverage their RRC-51 responsibility, granting the freedom to concentrate 100% on high-quality implementation and maximizing the program’s impact.
It Ensures Unimpeachable Transparency: A dedicated fund with a single, clear purpose makes all subsequent reporting for critical DAO initiatives far simpler and more accessible. The origin of every token spent on future governance work will be unequivocal, it came from the fund explicitly approved by the DAO for community growth, thereby maximizing transparency for all stakeholders.

I view the CSGF as a governance-centric infrastructure upgrade that supports the Foundation’s long-term goal of building a robust and transparent DAO. It’s an investment in maximum financial clarity that will make the execution of future DAO-approved programs smoother, safer, and more successful for everyone involved.

Anria · October 24, 2025, 5:31pm

@coffee-crusher Thank you for elaborating and for your continued focus on operational clarity. However, this proposal still introduces an unnecessary layer of separation and contradicts the purpose of RRC-51, which was specifically designed to unify treasury management and remove redundant structures.

The DAO already has a dedicated treasury — the Rari Chain DAO Treasury — which serves exactly the function this proposal describes. It is the on-chain, DAO-governed fund that can be used for community initiatives, contributor programs, and growth efforts through standard governance processes. There is no need to replicate this setup through a separate multisig wallet under a new label.

In addition, the Foundation’s mandates and funds are already ring-fenced — including the Strategic Partnership wallet with clear operational scopes, reporting standards, and DAO oversight. Together, these already provide the transparency and accountability the CSGF seeks to achieve, without creating another administrative layer.

Introducing a new multisig fund would only fragment existing treasury control, add accounting overhead, and blur the lines between DAO and Foundation responsibilities — the exact opposite of what RRC-51 intended.

coffee-crusher · October 25, 2025, 4:53am

Thank you, @Anria. Your feedback has been incredibly valuable, and you are absolutely right. The goal here is not to create complexity or fragment the treasury, it is to create clarity.

You are correct that RRC-51 and the existing DAO treasury is the proper, consolidated tools for this. I agree, my initial draft was operationally flawed.

Based on your feedback, I have made a significant revision to the proposal, and I will post a revision below with these changes. The proposal will no longer create a new CSGF multi-sig wallet.

Instead, it now does exactly what you suggested:

It formally re-allocates the 2026 budget line item.
It designates the CSGF as a formal “budgetary allocation” or “accounting firewall,” not a physical wallet.
The funds will remain in the main DAO treasury, managed by the Foundation per RRC-51, until they are called by a future DAO-approved spending proposal.

This achieves our shared goal: it provides a clear, ring-fenced budget for community growth while fully supporting and strengthening RRC-51’s mandate for a unified, non-fragmented treasury.

I have updated the main proposal text to reflect these critical changes. I believe it is now fully aligned with the Foundation’s goals, and thank you so much for your recommendations, I really appreciate it! Tk u!