I vote against this proposal on Snapshot.
I commend the team behind the development and implementation of STEP 1, as it has validated the thesis that Arbitrum can and should be a home for tokenized traditional assets.
That said, I am voting against it for two reasons:
First, the recent approval of Treasury Management v1.2 established a new committee to manage investments of ARB converted to stablecoins. Having two committees handling similar responsibilities through different channels and processes seems unnecessarily redundant.
Additionally, the results of STEP are just beginning to materialize in reports. It feels premature to vote on the renewal of a program only three months after its launch.
If the DAO intends to allocate additional resources to RWA, the newly formed committee should be responsible for managing them. However, I believe that if the DAO has just voted to allocate 10M to stablecoin investments, it reflects that this is the amount it deems appropriate at this time.
Secondly, as I have mentioned previously in other votes, I oppose the continued addition of isolated programs that use ARB to generate yield without a specific objective, projections, or long-term plan. While I support treasury management and investments, I disagree with the current approach, which lacks a comprehensive view of long-term needs and strategy.
Given that the OpCo has already been approved in the temp check and that treasury management will be one of its primary functions, I expect it to take on this responsibility as outlined, adopting an integral approach that considers the DAO’s medium- and long-term needs.