Retroactive rewards are much weaker incentives than base compensation or performance-based pay if they become locked or vesting. They are an unearned windfall at best, and a disappointing de minimis at worst.
We would not favor retroactive rewards for any council if they are denominated in OP. Work by governance has little effect on OP value, except to the extent that financing activities solely with OP reduces the value.
Given the unwillingness or inability to support tangible value accrual to OP token - either through distributions or through direct, disintermediated control of sequencer revenues for reinvestment in the project - it is pointless to try to align governance participants to the long-term price of the OP token.
While payment in OP is perfectly reasonable, any retroactive rewards meant to be delivered months after voting upon them should be denominated in dollars, ETH, or both.
More generally, a plan to use financing sources other than only OP dilution for governance activities is needed before Season 9.
We will cross post this opinion to other relevant budget threads for visibility.