Withdraw ₳1,150,000 for GovTool 12 months active maintenance and development
6 of 7 committee members voted
- Ace Alliance71aa5b3a…8f04YesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
Ace Alliance finds the proposed “Withdraw ₳1,150,000 for GovTool 12 months active maintenance and development” Governance Action Constitutional.
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
This Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action (gov_action16td...5sr06h) seeks to withdrawal 1,150,000 ada from the Cardano Treasury for 12 months of GovTool maintenance and development.
Article III, Section 5 indicates “...all proposed governance actions are expected to follow a standardized and legible format including a URL and hash of all documented off-chain content to the Cardano Blockchain. Sufficient rationale shall be provided to justify the requested change to the Cardano Blockchain. The rationale shall include, at a minimum, a title, abstract, reason for the proposal, and relevant supporting materials. The content of every on-chain governance action must be identical to the final off-chain version of the proposed action.” This proposed Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action meets these expectations.
Article IV, Section 3, Sentence 1 provides “Withdrawals from the Cardano Blockchain treasury that would cause the Cardano Blockchain treasury balance to violate the then applicable net change limit shall not be permitted.” This proposal, if enacted, would not violate the in-effect net change limit (gov_action1nd3...md2k80).
Article IV, Section 3, Sentence 2 provides “No withdrawals from the Cardano Blockchain treasury shall be permitted unless such withdrawals have been authorized and are being made pursuant to a budget for the Cardano Blockchain that is then in effect as required by the Cardano Blockchain Guardrails Appendix, and which has not been determined by the Constitutional Committee to be unconstitutional.” This Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action is submitted pursuant to the approved “Cardano GovTool Budget - 12 months full active maintenance and development” Budget Info Action (gov_action1n5s...xwm88m).
Article IV, Section 4, Sentence 1 provides “Any governance action requesting ada from the Cardano Blockchain treasury shall require an allocation of ada as a part of such funding request to cover the cost of periodic independent audits and the implementation of oversight metrics as to the use of such ada.” In our assessment of governance action constitutionality, we consider information included in the proposed governance action and the linked, immutable content it incorporates.
Here, the immutable proposed Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action rationale links to and incorporates the corresponding immutable Budget Info Action (gov_action1n5s...xwm88m) in the Abstract and Supporting Links sections. Accordingly, we consider this information in assessing constitutionality under Article IV, Section 4, Sentence 1.
Under the Constitutionality Checklist section of that Budget Info Action, and citing the relevant authority, it states “This proposal, if approved, intends to use part of the ₳100k committed by Intersect to cover cost of periodic independent audits.” Because we consider this linked, immutable information in our assessment, the only remaining question as to constitutionality on this point is whether this satisfies Article IV, Section 4, Sentence 1 by constituting “an allocation of ada as a part of such funding request.”
We find that it does satisfy this requirement for two reasons.
First, this constitutes an allocation of ada — it allocates ₳100k in the possession of the Administrator for this purpose — and that allocation is a part of such funding request, the Treasury Withdrawal Governance Action and incorporated Budget Info Action. The Constitution does not require, for example, “an allocation of ada as a part of such *funding received*,” or “an allocation of ada *from* such requested funds.” Here, the text of the incorporated Budget Info Action constitutes an allocation of ₳100k as a part of such funding request.
Second, finding an action unconstitutional for proactively allocating Administrator-held ada to cover these costs conflicts with the objective purpose of the requirement — this proposal’s provision for the cost of audit and oversight is more restrictive than what the Constitution requires, not less.
Article IV, Section 4, Sentence 2 provides “Contractual obligations governing the use of ada received from the Cardano Blockchain treasury pursuant to a Cardano Blockchain ecosystem budget shall include dispute resolution provisions.” The proposal indicates Intersect-facilitated legal contracts will be entered into which include dispute resolution processes.
Article IV, Section 5 requires “Any ada received from a Cardano Blockchain treasury withdrawal, so long as such ada is being held directly or indirectly by an administrator prior to further disbursement, must be kept in one or more separate accounts that can be audited by the Cardano Community, and such accounts shall not be delegated to an SPO but must be delegated to the predefined auto abstain voting option.” This proposal fulfills the constitutional requirement, as Intersect’s Treasury Reserve Smart Contract (TRSC) is the designated recipient of the requested funds, and the provided stake credential is not delegated to a stake pool and delegated to the auto-abstain pre-defined voting option.
Ace Alliance finds the proposed “Withdraw ₳1,150,000 for GovTool 12 months active maintenance and development” Governance Action Constitutional.
- Cardano Atlantic Council07e0eb70…5bdeYesResigned · term ends epoch 653Rationale
This governance action, as proposed, is Constitutional.
The proposal titled "Withdraw ₳1,150,000 for GovTool 12 months active maintenance and development" is constitutional. Per our constitutionality review, all relevant articles, guardrails, and other requirements of constitutionality were met.
- Cardano Japan Council725d4d44…7b31YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
We consider this governance action to be constitutional.
This proposal was a withdrawal GA, so we primarily focused our review on Article 4 of the Constitution and concluded it is constitutional. (Article 3, Section 5) This proposal clearly states its purpose as 12 months of full active maintenance and development of GovTool, with appropriate justification and content URLs provided. There are no issues from a formal standpoint. (Article 4, Section 1) This proposal concerns a one-year governance process and does not deviate from this clause. (Article 4, Section 2) Budget management is delegated to Intersect, utilizing the Treasury Reserve Smart Contract (TRSC) and the Project-Specific Smart Contract (PSSC), which we deem acceptable. (Article 4, Section 3) It does not exceed the NCL at this time. (Article 4, Section 4) It is deemed compliant as Intersect manages it and a written off-chain legal contract is created. (Article 4, Section 5) The designated account is not delegated to the SPO, and DRep delegation is auto-abstain type, so it is acceptable.
For the reasons stated above, we unanimously determined that it is constitutional.
- KtorZ64f97568…3a49YesExpired · term ends epoch 653Rationale
👍 LGTM
A PDF version of this rationale is also made available.
While the withdrawal's rationale does not designate an independent auditor as per Article IV.4, it was the case on the (previously approved) budget withdrawal which stated: "This proposal, if approved, intends to use part of the ₳100k committed by Intersect to cover cost of periodic independent audits". The constitution does not require to specifically name the auditor at the time of the withdrawal, only to have provision for one.
The withdrawal is also made to Intersect's treasury smart contract. Moreover, Intersect is part of the metadata's signatories which signals awareness of them (a) receiving a treasury withdrawal; and (b) being the administrator of it.
- Tingvard646d1b3a…be43YesActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
Tingvard judge the “Withdraw ₳1,150,000 for GovTool 12 months active maintenance and development” treasury withdrawal governance action constitutional.
This governance action is properly framed as a treasury withdrawal under Article IV. It requests ₳1,150,000 to fund 12 months of maintenance and development for GovTool, Cardano’s open-source, community-owned governance tooling platform. The withdrawal follows the budget Info action gov_action1n5s...xwm88m, which approved the associated budget, satisfying the constitutional requirement to align withdrawal actions with an approved budget plan (Article IV, § 1).
The action satisfies the requirements of Article IV, § 2, which governs administration of treasury funds. Administration of the funds will be handled by Intersect through a treasury management smart contract framework developed by Sundae Labs and audited by TxPipe and MLabs. Funds will be held in a Treasury Reserve Smart Contract (TRSC) and disbursed to Project-Specific Smart Contracts (PSSCs) as milestones are met. An Oversight Committee of five independent entities is established to verify key administrative actions on-chain. The Oversight Committee’s limited powers and on-chain verification mechanisms align with the principle of ensuring funds are administered with constitutional accountability.
The action also satisfies Article IV, § 4, which requires measures to ensure transparency and auditability of treasury usage. Milestones, acceptance criteria, and payment schedules are defined, with delivery verification conducted by Intersect or a third-party assurer before disbursement. A public dashboard (cardanotreasury.fi) will allow the community to audit fund flows, track milestones, and verify spending immutably on-chain. The inclusion of delivery assurance processes and third-party verification provides the transparency and accountability required by the Constitution.
Article IV, § 5 requires treasury funds not to be delegated to a stake pool operator (SPO) and, where delegated, to use the predefined auto-abstain DRep. The proposal explicitly states that the TRSC and PSSCs cannot delegate to SPOs and will delegate only to the auto-abstain predefined DRep. This satisfies the non-delegation and delegation requirements of Article IV, § 5.
The action further aligns with the constitutional principles outlined in Article II. It supports the sustainability of Cardano’s governance infrastructure (Tenet 9), enhances decentralisation by providing open-source governance tools accessible to all participants, and upholds transparency and community oversight by making all code public and establishing reporting and verification mechanisms.Tingvard finds this treasury withdrawal governance action constitutional. It conforms to Article IV, § 1–5 and aligns with the Cardano Blockchain Tenets of sustainability, transparency, and decentralisation. The governance design ensures that treasury funds are administered with appropriate oversight, disbursed according to verified milestones, safeguarded under the delegation rules, and transparently auditable by the community.
- Eastern Cardano Council2ea7a78e…10ecNoActive · term ends epoch 726Rationale
We have determined that this treasury withdrawal governance action is unconstitutional.
The governance action with ID "gov_action16td...5sr06h" and title "Withdraw ₳1,150,000 for GovTool 12 months active maintenance and development" is a Treasury Withdrawal, so is subject to the following sections and guardrails in the Cardano Constitution.
ARTICLE III, Section 5 - This governance action includes a valid URL and hash, which matches the hash of the off-chain documentation referenced. The rationale also meets the minimum content specified in this section.
ARTICLE IV, Section 3, Paragraph 1 - This governance action would not "cause the Cardano Blockchain treasury balance to violate the then applicable net change limit".
ARTICLE VII, Section 6 - This governance action specifies a withdrawal address, which at the time of assessment is not delegated to an SPO and is delegated to the auto abstain voting option.
Guardrails TREASURY-01a, TREASURY-02a, TREASURY-03a and TREASURY-04a - This governance action fulfils the requirements specified in these guardrails.
However; ARTICLE IV, Section 4 states "Any governance action requesting ada from the Cardano Blockchain treasury shall require an allocation of ada as a part of such funding request to cover the cost of periodic independent audits and the implementation of oversight metrics as to the use of such ada. Contractual obligations governing the use of ada received from the Cardano Blockchain treasury pursuant to a Cardano Blockchain ecosystem budget shall include dispute resolution provisions."
This governance action does NOT specify "an allocation of ada as a part of such funding request to cover the cost of periodic independent audits and the implementation of oversight metrics", so does NOT fulfil the requirements of this section.
We therefore find this governance action Unconstitutional.
This governance action does NOT sufficiently fulfil the criteria specified for treasury withdrawals in the Cardano Constitution, so is deemed unconstitutional.
- Phil_uplc68bb0b42…8746Not votedExpired · term ends epoch 653No rationale