Season 5: Intents Budget Proposal

Grants Council Lead: Lund Ventures
Season: Season 5

Intent #1: Progress Towards Technical Decentralization
Proposed Budget: 1.33M OP (+0.33M Season 4 Budget)**
Please provide reasoning: This Intent includes crucial components of the Optimism community’s goals to optimize for security and decentralization. This Intent is expected to encompass some of the features of the Season 4 Request for Grant (RFG) program (e.g., Audit and security programs), which accounts for the proposed increase relative to Season 4. See RFG Roundup (including also code audit and RPC finalists from Season 4). The inclusion of an Unallocated Budget and Repurposing provision enable any course correction should this budget underestimate need.

Up to 1M may be reserved and used for code audit or similar code security programs (e.g., AI smart contract review, fault detection & security monitoring), but may be otherwise generally used for the Intent. The delegates making proposals under this Intent shall be in charge of specifying whether the proposal should be considered under the Audit and Security category or under the general Intent 1 budget.

The budget is drafted on the assumption that much of Intent 1 (e.g., Council) will be subsidized by Foundation allocations, independent of this budget.

Intent #2: Grow the Superchain
Proposed Budget: 4M OP (-1M Season 4 Budget*)**
Please provide reasoning: This Intent is similar to Intent 2 from Season 4, with a more expansive focus (the Superchain). While the focus is broader, it is difficult to assess what fraction will be Builders or Experiments grants. The initial allocation to this Intent is 1M lower than the initial allocation in Season 4, which is due primarily to 1M being being reserved in the Unallocated Budget (below) and the fact that the RFG program (2M in Season 4) will not be specific to this Intent in Season 5, as it was in Season 4 (see more at * below).

Up to 0.5M OP may be used for RPC subsidization, but may otherwise be used for other purposes if not used for RPC subsidization.

*Season 4 began with an Intent 2 budget of 5M (2M Experiments, 1M Builders, 2M RFG). Based on demand, the remainder of Season 4’s unallocated Intent budget (~2.5M) was repurposed pursuant to Collective vote mid-Season to Experiments and Builders grants within Intent 2 (see here). The total Season 4 allocation was therefore closer to 5.5M for Experiments and Builders grants and 2M for RFGs. As this budget (a) includes an Unallocated Budget portion and (b) a clause for Repurposing and (c) the RFG program is distributed amongst the intents for Season 5, the initialbudget proposal is not higher.

Intent #3: Improve the Consumer Experience
Proposed Budget: 1.33M OP (+0.33M Season 4 Budget)**
Please provide reasoning: This Intent is an important step to making Optimism a long-term home for Web3 participants. The proposed budget increase represents a recognition that the community came together to design the Intent, which encapsulates the philosophy of demand-based granting (undergirding the RFG process in Season 4). As the Intent is currently experimental and the Season 4 utilization for Intent 3 was fairly low, a larger increase was considered premature. The inclusion of an Unallocated Budget and Repurposing provision enable any course correction should this budget underestimate need.

Intent #4: Improve Governance Accessibility
Proposed Budget: 1.33M OP (-1.66M Season 4 Budget)**
Please provide reasoning: This Intent represents a needed feature of the Optimism Collective–broad and diverse governance. The budget for this Intent is reduced based on low utilization in Season 4 (e.g., ~1.4M was unused for Intent 4). The inclusion of an Unallocated Budget and Repurposing provision enable any course correction should this budget underestimate need.

Unallocated Budget (1M OP): It is not possible to predict with accuracy which Intents will receive the highest quality proposals or the greatest demand. Should this proposal pass, 1M OP will be reserved for general allocation to any of the Intents.

Repurposing: The Council may propose to repurpose the allocation of the budget dedicated one or more Intents during Season 5, provided the community is given two weeks to consider the proposal and one week to vote on the proposal. The proposal process will adhere to the reflection period proposal type outlined in the Operating Manual.

Total Intents Budget: up to 9M OP (-1M Season 4)

**Note that it is difficult to compare Season 4 and Season 5 directly, as the number and structure of Cycles differ. The Foundation may be of assistance in articulating the difference, either through guides on this Forum or in any clarifying comments below.


GFX Labs is a delegate with the required voting power to support moving this proposal to a vote.


I’m one of the top 100 delegates and I support moving this proposal to a vote.


Im a delegate with voting power above the required threshold I believe this proposal is ready for vote Optimism Agora


GM! This is my opinion and does not represent the GovNerds.

From what I recall in the previous season, Intent 1 used only 40% of the budget, while Intents 3 and 4 utilized approximately 60%. Given this, I don’t see a compelling reason to increase their allocations if the intents are the same or similar than in Season 4.

My suggestion is to maintain Intent 1 at 1M OP, Intent 3 at 1M OP, and I agree with 1.5M OP for Intent 4 and 4M OP for Intent 2.

Additionally, I remember there were discussions concerning Intent 3, with some projects potentially having a better fit for RetroPGF. Considering that OP will probably locked for a year, it might be a more beneficial approach for projects to start a bit “underfunded” via Missions and then bridge the gap through RetroPGF once the results of their work and impact on Optimism are evident. Missions can provide a clear pathway for projects to create impact while aligning with our objectives. Furthermore, if they achieve success in missions, they can receive additional rewards through RetroPGF.

In my opinion, we should engage in more discussions regarding the Intents Budget before proceeding to the voting phase.


This is my opinion and does not represent the GovNerd or Grants Council

I believe this is a signal that Intent 1 (Technical decentralization) should have more weight than Intent 4 (Governance accessibility) during this season. Maybe because Intent 4 was exhausted last season and Intent 1 didn’t get the proper attention, or because this time delegates must do mission requests and the mission alignments could be different. I also think Intent 1 will include something like the “code audits” RFG we saw before which is a huge part of this intent budget.

While I agree a lot of Season 4 missions were sent to RetroPGF, I believe one of the biggest differences between S4 and S5 is that the top 100 delegates must create mission requests. This will probably create a high-quality alignment, and having a conservative budget that can be repurposed if it’s not entirely used looks safer than having to cut out good projects because of budget constraints.

Watching token house mission votes last season and grant council budgets, I think there’s a lot more damage in having a budget contained than having a spare budget that last season was repurposed or “given back” by the Grant Council. (Grants Council makes no distribution that why I used " ")

I agree we need to add a 2 day reflection period in the calendar between all posted proposals and the vote date for minor adjustments and feedback incorporation.


I am an Optimism delegate with sufficient voting power , and I believe this proposal is ready to move to a vote.

Regarding the proposed allocations, my first impression is that having a “large” budget for Progress Towards Technical Decentralization is always a good idea and requires the correct financing when quality ideas appear. With the introduction of the Advisory Board, everything would be aligned in favor of a good performance.


For context on the Intent #1 budget, pulling directly from the Season 5 Intents post:

How the Governance Fund Supports Intent #1:
The Governance Fund will support this Intent in a limited capacity:

  • While this Intent continues to be the Collective’s highest priority, many of the projects that support progress towards technical decentralization require high context and specific expertise.
  • This work will be reflected primarily in Foundation Mission Requests and ongoing core development work by community teams like OP Labs, Coinbase, RiscZero and O(1) Labs.

The above explains why the budget for Intent #1 was lower relative to other Intents in Season 4 even though it’s the Collective’s top priority.

In Season 5, I believe there is a large component of the proposed budget for Intent #1 that pertains to an Auditing RFG? @danelund.eth or @jackanorak it would be helpful to understand how much, if any, of the proposed Intent #1 budget that comprises so we can better compare Intent #1 budgets across Season 4 and 5 :pray:


Please note that the Proposed Budget has been revised based on comments received. It is 2M OP lower, reflected in reductions to all Intents but Intent 2, which has been increased relative to the prior draft.

It is not possible to project what demand or need will look like, which is a lesson from Season 4 relative to Season 3; however, should demand exceed the budget, that may be a matter for the community to consider in a future grants program or in the RPGF process.

Prospectively, it may make sense to revisit budget proposals at the middle of a season as a matter of course, should there be a merit to an increase based on findings from the first half of the Season.

@brichis @Joxes @GFXlabs @MoneyManDoug @Gonna.eth


Perfectly fine with the reduction, my approval still stands. imo it would be better to over request and return funds at seasons end rather than push a token house vote out later.


I am a delegate with enough voting power and also believe it is ready to move forward. I would like to second @MoneyManDoug’s comments regarding budget.

1 Like

My approval still stands.

1 Like

Based on comments, there have been an additional set of updates to the draft budget. The current draft includes an Unallocated Budget of 2M OP and reduces the allocation specifically designated to Intent 2 to 4M. It is difficult to project based on the new structure and level of interest what the optimal budget would be, but this draft endeavors to incorporate the perspectives that worry about underallocation as well. This is expected to be the final update.

@GFXlabs @Gonna.eth @MoneyManDoug @brichis @Joxes @PGov


I am a delegate with sufficient voting power and I believe that this is ready to move to a vote.

I think the new changes to the proposal are a good incorporation of the feedback given.

Edit: Also support the 1m reduction in the un-allocated budget.

1 Like

For reference on the difference in structure between Season 4 and 5 Dane is referring to:

  • In Season 4, the Grants Council processed grants under Intent #2 only; in Season 5, the Grants Council will process grants under all 4 Intents
  • In Season 4, the Grants Council processed all valid grant applications under Intent #2, as either builders or growth grants; In Season 5, the Grants Council will process grant applications for approved Mission Requests. It is not possible to know in advance which Mission Requests will be drafted and approved by delegates.
  • As we have restructured the grants process in Season 5, there is little precedent upon which to base budget estimates, which could support the flexibility an “unallocated” budget would provide

After reading through the revisions my approval above is still valid.

1 Like

Same here. Our approval continues to be valid.

1 Like

I’m one of the top 100 delegates and I support moving this proposal to a vote.

Thank you @danelund.eth for taking our comments into consideration.

1 Like

Reduced Unallocated Budget to 1M OP to be less than any single Intent budget.


After reading this last modification, my approval above is still valid.

1 Like