Withdraw ₳5,885,000 for OSC Budget Proposal - Paid Open Source Model...
This treasury withdrawal funds **OSC Budget Proposal - Paid Open Source Model for Sustainable Development** which will provide the following services: The Open Source Committee in conjunction with the Open Source Office (OSO) seeks to enact a Paid Open Source Model for Sustainable Development in Cardano. A budget proposal of ₳5,885,000, designed to ensure the long-term sustainability of open-source development within the Cardano ecosystem. This initiative will be managed by the Open Source Committee (OSC) pending approval by the DReps, and seeks to address the critical funding gaps that hinder the maintenance, security, and growth of essential open-source projects. This Treasury Withdrawal is submitted by Intersect on behalf of the Open Source Committee. The following sections; Abstract, Motivation, Rationale and Vendor Profile have been sourced from the approved proposal submitted by the Vendor as part of the Intersect budget process. This treasury withdrawal funds one of 39 proposals to give effect to the approved budget info action for ₳275,269,340, administered by Intersect via gov_action1u9x73kwufaxa70lfy59g4ynwyrcsaxdcd0gxzzmh67s9fxq4j8hqqk2phgh. The information provided herein is intended to fulfill the spirit of the constitutional requirement for a treasury withdrawal info action by also providing the details of the proposed solution, alignment to the budget, and amount to be withdrawn from the Cardano Treasury.
Reasoning
Written after the vote was cast
What this asks for, and from whom
5,885,000 ADA for the Open Source Committee budget, paid open source development.
What would have to be true for this to be a good use of treasury funds
Open source maintainers working unpaid is the quiet risk under every blockchain. Most maintainers of critical libraries are volunteers, and volunteers quit.
What specifically concerns me
This was part of the 2025 Intersect budget slate, which I voted as a slate. I am saying that plainly rather than pretending each line got its own week of deliberation. The slate came through a community budget process with a support threshold before it ever reached the chain, and my judgment was that the process outcome deserved backing in Cardano's first real treasury cycle. My consistent position across this whole category: I support paying maintainers directly, and I am skeptical of new administrative bodies created to distribute that money. I voted no on the dOSPO program twice for exactly that reason while voting yes on direct maintenance grants repeatedly.
What I am asking of the proposer if this passes
It was enacted. Keep the money flowing to maintainers rather than to the machinery around them. Overhead ratio is the number worth publishing here.