Some overview about upcoming topics regarding Treasury, Liquidity and Exec Team Custody funds

There was/is some discussion in Discord, Council Calls and Swim Meet about some upcoming proposals and topics regarding decisions to be made about tokens in the Treasury, Liquidity and funds Exec Team Custody which will dissolve in early Q2.

This post should provide a general overview about some of that topics, so everyone who wants to chime in can do that. I plan to do some separate proposals regarding them, so just see it as some overview announcement.

TL;DR at the end, these topics mostly got discussed on the Discord already, I just wanna give people on the gov forum also the opportunity to chime in if there are no replies, that’s fine as well!

The Treasury can be seen here:
It includes assets on multiple chains, tokens on L2s are hold by Exec Team currently.
Let’s focus on tokens on ETH first. (Can be seen on Etherscan here:

We got 91.4 SPETHWIN, that’s Sponsorhip for the Pool from this proposal . The Pool is still running and donating funds for public goods which is very good! The gas funds Witnet provided are depleted though and awarding happens pro bono by underethsea .
In the near future we should withdraw from it and possibly deposit into the V5 ETH deployment.
We also got PTaUSDC currently deposited into V4 which will be depreciated soon.
These funds should also be withdrawn and deposited somewhere else.

We also got stETH and aDAI which are fine but I also think depositing them into Ethereum V5 would be benefical cause it leads to a higher Grand Prize which makes it generally more attractive.

Regarding Treasury funds being deposited into V5 ETH, I would also propose depositing some into the multi delegator and making some Community members Representatives for Delegations. Yes, gas fees on ETH are high and we probably won’t use it often but having it as an option and tool for collaborations with other mainnet protocols is important imo.

Second point is Uniswap V3 liquidity in the Treasury.
The Treasury currently holds 6 LP NFTs containing roughly 640k POOL and 4 ETH in unclaimed fees.
I would at least propose claiming those fees.
But generally I think removing the Uniswap V3 NFTs and redeploying some of it as Uni V2 would make sense. Uni V2 is auto compounding the fees and we won’t have to worry about them being out of range again.
Deploying all POOL again as V2 would cost at current prices 60 ETH or 220k $, I would propose to at least redeploy half of it again. Our liquidity on OP is quite good right and with the DeFi Collective proposal would give us liquidity on Base and Arbitrum. Important to note that all Uni V3 LPs are currently out of range and provide no liquidty, redeploying as Uni V2 would strengthen our liquidity at the current price point although I have to admit would weaken liquidity if POOL goes up.

The last topic are funds in Exec Team Custody and related to that V4 funds flowing into the Prize Distributor after V4 has been depreciated.
This topic is probably the most recent and urgent cause the Exec Team will dissolve in early Q1.
As it looks right now, Uma oSnap is looking very good for keeping the OP tokens and giving Governance through Snapshot the ability to do stuff with it, citing myself from Discord here:

"Two downsides I still see with it though, first we still would need a multi sig (not oSnap fault though and using it together with a Gnosis Safe is better than only having the Safe, we could also increase signers from 5/8 to 7/8 maybe to increase security even more and cause the signers wouldn’t need to do any frequent actions anymore), second snapshot is not rly decentralized and permissionless, only a couple people can propose snapshot votes and there are admins. So far that wasn’t a real problem cause we only rly used snapshots for temp checks and stuff but if snapshot voters rly have custody of funds and can do transactions that’s something to consider.

I’m still for implementing it and think we should use it to custody delegation budget, OP tokens and protocol owned liquidity (not only on OP but all L2s we need/want)."
For more information regarding oSnap see here:

The other funds in Exec Team custody are, see full list here (source:, date: Jan 24):

chain position count value
Optimsim OP 87,982 $246,351
Optimism USDC for delegation 250,000 $250,000
Optimism pUSDC/USDC 25,000 $25,000
Optimism pUSDC.e/USDC 25,000 $25,000
Optimism POOL/ETH 47,533 POOL / 0.2279 ETH $15,000
Optimism Prize Liquidity 68,401 $68,401
Polygon Prize Liquidity 78,408 $78,408
Polygon stMatic 35,318 $28,416
Polygon ARENA 248,489 -
Polygon POOL/ETH 68,229 POOL/ 0.4611 ETH $6,000
Ethereum Prize Liquidity 80,684 $80,684
Avalanche Prize Liquidity 26,779 $26,779

Notably here are the 250k Delegations Budget which we maybe wanna keep.
The Prize liquidity (aka funds in the Prize distributor) Ticket liquidity (pUSDC/USDC and pUSDC.e/USDC) will probably just be bridged back as USDC to ETH.
stMatic tokens could be sold, ARENA tokens maybe kept in the Polygon Multi sig.

I hope this little overview maybe helped some people getting more familiar with some current topics, also here a TL;DR:

  1. What do to with stETH win Sponsorship and V4 deposits in Treasury (and other tokens like stETH and aDAI but not as urgently)?
  2. What do to with UNI V3 liquidity in Treasury?
  3. What do to with funds in Exec Team Custody (especially OP tokens and Delegations)?

Hey @Lonser, my name is Alex and I work on integrations at UMA. I agree this would be a great use for oSnap and feel free to ask any UMA + oSnap questions.

On the downsides you mentioned, having oSnap would enable PoolTogether to increase the signers as you mentioned. Another option worth mentioning since PoolTogether has a governor contract used with Tally, PoolTogether could enable the governor as a module on the Safe and use onchain voting with Tally as a fallback. However, the DAO would have to wait for the Voting Period + delay so having the multi-sig signers might still be an easier option.

For the Snapshot point, there have been implementations that might be helpful to look at, such as CoW DAO in this proposal decided to:

  • remove admins and authors
  • add community moderators to filter spam
  • use a token threshold for submitting new proposals
  • make the Safe the sole admin of the Space for Snapshot changes

Lastly, just want to mention:

  • UMA covers gas costs for transactions used with oSnap making governance decisions free for DAOs.
  • UMA has implemented a bot that validates proposals and sponsors a verification program that pays UMA community members to verify all optimistic oracle assertions. So when any transactions are proposed through oSnap, a Discord ticket is automatically created and an experienced verifier from the UMA community completes a multi-step verification process that focuses on areas such as the transaction payload matching the intent of the proposal, verifies transactions do not include interactions with malicious contracts, etc.

Let me know if you have any questions!