Updating the OpCo Foundation’s Operational Capability

[jameskbh]

Thnaks for the proposal/update.

I have a few questions regarding some items.

Inability to Interact with Service Providers

In the current proposal, the following example is provided.

@Arbitrum

To illustrate the issue, let’s consider an example where a contributor approaches the OpCo with a proposal for the DAO and the OpCo thinks it may be valuable for the ecosystem. Unfortunately, the OpCo cannot engage with a consulting firm to evaluate the idea. The only option available for OpCo is to encourage the contributor to seek permission (and potential funding from exploratory work) from the DAO.

I view the OpCo as operational infrastructure to address the most common demands within the DAO, and evaluating proposal “worthiness” is a core part of this. Therefore, relying on external SPs to fulfil this should be an exception, rather than the rule, and it would need a DAO approval for the request. I’m saying this because I can see a “department” within the “placeholder budget” for internal employees to do exactly that.

@Entropy

OpCo’s budget is intended to fund its initial 30-month term, with funds covering the entity’s legal setup, any outsourced professional services required for operations such as legal counsel and accounting/auditing services, other incurred operating expenses such as business-critical software and insurance, internal full-time employee salaries, and the OAT’s salaries.

This proposal would earmark 30M ARB to cover OpCo’s initial term, with an exemplary budget breakdown shown below. This is not an official budget, meaning that capital may be budgeted and allocated differently once the entity is stood up. For example, Employee #4 doesn’t have to be hired at a yearly salary of ~$130K. The exemplary budget’s purpose is instead to showcase that the ask isn’t arbitrary, and how the figure has been derived. It’s also important to note that several line items, such as entity setup and legal services are notably larger than what the actual expenses are expected to be. This was done to account for any unforeseen events or worst-case scenarios which could require notable capital commitments.

While it is not mandatory to follow a 10-employee setup, OpCO should be able to handle its expected tasks with its internal employees. For example, equivalent to PMs to follow all initiatives, and researchers to cover the most common/relevant topics/proposals for the DAO.

That has a direct relationship with most of the other points, so my main questions are: What is the structure the OAT is planning/envisioning for the OpCo? What should/could be handled internally?

Compensation for OpCo Employees and Restrictions Around Council Elections.

I mostly agree with those items, as they will provide more flexibility and position OpCo better when trying to find the right person for the roles. I would like to see a revised set of rules (not only the fixes) for the Council Elections so that the delegates can ratify them.

Regarding the vote

We are bundling several items in this topic. What is the voting strategy you are envisioning for this?

Thank you for the thorough analysis and for suggesting amendments to relevant items before the structure is finalised.