For the same reasons I voted against it during the temp-check, I am voting against it again on Tally.
Sorry for not replying to your questions earlier. I’m not against what you’re saying, but rather against this initiative running independently while other initiatives are already in place to manage the same tools.
I understand that they may have different “objectives” (though one could argue that the treasury management initiative has the same effect when it comes to grants vs. investments), but I believe this approach (having separte managements) is inefficient and lacks coordination with a long-term vision.
In this regard, I still believe there is no need to renew a program that is still ongoing, especially when the DAO has already approved another treasury management initiative, which is currently in the process of onboarding service providers.
Additionally, I remain concerned about the liquidity of the ARB token and the impact of continuously dumping it for stablecoins to fund DAO activities without a plan to mitigate this effect.
Lastly, I also have significant doubts about the timing of this vote (though this is not the proposers’ responsibility), as ARB is at historical lows, and this may not be the best moment to sell.
Again, I think you did a great job, and I’m grateful for it.