CIP-124 Q4 Funding

SIMPLE SUMMARY

Q4 is fast approaching and no budget or mechanism allocated to pay contributors during that period exists. Q3 included a lot of restructuring and clarity was gained via an approved vote a short 7 weeks ago (July 24). Planning Guild is working on Charter amendments to address future structure and budgets, but until those are in place and approved by the DAO, we risk some level of disorder on October 1st. Extending the Q3 Funding period, with some alterations below, appears to be a simple strategy to keep core functions and Guild projects ongoing, while limiting the amount of confusion associated with a more complex structure and budget for Q4.

SPECIFICATION

Extend the funding period included in the passed CIP-69 Q3 Guild Structure and Budget to include the period from October 1, 2022 to December 31, 2022 with the following alterations:

  1. Facilitators will continue to work in their current positions, unless they’ve stepped down from a role.
  2. The Planning and Operations Guild shall:
    • Maintain operations functions related to communication channels.
    • Revise and implement improved Charter and processes, with specific focus on clarifying and automating governance structures. The Charter should be posted and easily navigable once complete and approved by the DAO.
    • Make efforts visible to the community, provide regular status updates and shall hold a weekly call.
  3. Discontinue the use of NFTs as Facilitator compensation.
  4. Guild Safes will utilize unused USDC and NFTs from Q3 for Q4 operational costs.
  5. USDC and NFT’s remaining in Guild Safes on January 1, 2023 will be used to credit Q1 2023 funding budgets for each guild, if any is proposed.
  6. Should a Guild not plan to exist in Q1, 2023, all funds will be sent to the Treasury: 0x60e7343205C9C88788a22C40030d35f9370d302D

An APPROVE vote would mean you approve an extension of the Q3 Funding period as amended above.

A REJECT vote would mean you reject an extension of funding.

Polis Conversation Report: https://pol.is/report/r93bsr9mwv34rcr2aezhu

23 Likes

I would like to propose that a Real Estate Guild be restarted and funded in Q4 so that we can continue focusing on buying land and property.

Revised proposal Sept 18:


Guild Name: Real Estate

Description: I would like to propose that a Real Estate Guild be restarted and funded in Q4 so that we can continue focusing on buying land and property for citizens, providing bounties for research, and engaging the community. The guild will focus on acquiring more land for use for CityDAO Citizens, specifically maintaining and scaling up baby parcel efforts.

Q4 Budget: $40k

Members:

Scott (facilitator) - comp: $3k / quarter

Founder of CityDAO and CTO at AirGarage. Built and scaled startups and led and managed teams. Worked at Facebook, CERN, and several startups.

Josh - comp: $3k quarter

Josh has over 10 years of experience with commercial real estate transactions and legal counseling and advisory. Having worked with executive teams and boards of directors for many of those years, Josh has unique insight into the executive mindset and Josh believes that web3 can help to change the toxic dynamics that create inefficient outcomes for organizations based on leadership structures. Josh will use his experience and insight to manage projects and issues relating to legal and real estate considerations and to help empower members of the community to contribute further on a project basis. Josh will also assist with property acquisition and execution of Projects.

Mandate

Acquisition of more land for use for CityDAO Citizens, maintaining and scaling up baby parcel efforts.

KPIs:

  • Number of parcels owned by CityDAO

  • Number of Citizens using CityDAO land

1 Like

What are you spending 30k on since real estate agents and most folks in that industry work on commission?

I am happy to supply the 20th like for this. Thank you Alex for putting this together. I think that CIP-69 has some problems that result from a lack of teamwork in putting it together and that the resultant conflicts stem therefrom, but we need another quarter for the DAO to continue its operarations. There is no irreparable damage, the DAO is not broken, we are still committed to a vision. We just need time to find our moral opthamologist, so that our vision achieves greater clarity.

1 Like

Does this idea (Real Estate Guild) complement or replace the current Snapshot vote which seeks to use Planning Guild funds to buy more land? Seems like maybe they could be combined. The Snapshot vote makes no mention of payments to any party, but this guild suggests paying Josh double what anyone else earns as a facilitator. I would suggest either we pay legal costs as they arise (such as closing costs), or we keep all facilitator payments in equitable alignment.

How about we focus what we have now then think about start the RE guild again, maybe 2023 ?

We have CIP 100 and baby parcel here and in both we already have Josh there.

So instead of buying other lands, we focus to built things on these ones.

1 Like

@alexthims @Fugyeah @simplepixellife
Thanks for the feedback. I think adding funding back for the Real Estate Guild is the right move and wanted to address concerns. I clarified the mandate of the guild and lowered Josh’s comp in this final proposal. Here it is:

Real Estate Guild Q4 Proposal


Justification:
Real Estate is one of the DAOs most important activities, and if we want to keep mission-aligned folks working on cool projects, this will go along way. For example, this will allow us to maintain and scale the baby parcel project, provide bounties for land research to engage the community, etc.

CIP-100 is going to take a while since they are figuring out details around taxes, potentially creating a non-profit entity, etc. this will enable the DAO to have some wins this quarter.

I support buying land and generally having a RE Guild. However, it feels like the attached proposal was somewhat cursory. The mandate was just “acquisition of more land for use for CityDAO Citizens, maintaining and scaling up baby parcel efforts.”

There isn’t much clarity on what kinds of land will be acquired, whether it’s just up to you and Josh to choose the land, what the land will be used for other than “use for citizens” and what it means to “scale up” baby parcel. The first baby parcel hasn’t been implemented yet. If the first baby parcel doesn’t work (I’m not sure how success is defined here) then it might be putting the cart before the horse to buy 3-4 new parcels.

I don’t mean to slow down building for the sake of defining terms, but to build without a sense of what determines success is to miss out on the point of benchmarking KPIs.

“Number of parcels owned by CityDAO” doesn’t seem like a very reasonable KPI, as you achieve it not by finding suitable parcels to achieve a stated purpose, or by using them properly, but just by buying any land. The other KPI, “Number of Citizens using CityDAO land” is currently, and always has been, zero.

I suggest that we establish what makes a purchase “successful”, whether it has to do with profits, citizen satisfaction with process, number of media mentions as a result, etc. and also define what would constitute “effective land use”. Then we could see for each parcel purchased what score it is receiving, rather than just loading up on land.

1 Like

@alexthims and @Da3vid

I agree that we could have a more coherent vision for how to use the land, and we are working on it. The basic premise is right now, Baby Parcel is small and has room for only a few Citizens. We want to buy a couple more parcels in the neighborhood to enable us to have space for more citizens.

I propose we let the voters decide and have 3 options on the Snapshot:
YES
YES, and 40k for Real Estate Guild
NO