VDP-66 Proposal to Adjust Spending Authorization Limits and Authority


VitaDAO has been operating for just over a year, and as part of feedback received by working group members individually and through a series of internal discussions, we propose to adjust spending authorization limits and sign-off authority to establish better accountability and responsibility for achieving VitaDAO’s goals, while reducing operational delays in execution.

This proposal suggests modifications to VDP-1 and VDP-6


VitaDAO has, since its inception, relied on a highly aligned core group of contributors (VitaCore) to jointly make decisions on operational spending, which was necessary in the absence of a formal system of requisition-approval-spend of working group treasury.

During the past year, as VitaDAO has grown, the Operations Working Group developed a number of internal workflow tools, as well as using ecosystem-developed tools like Utopia and Parcel for payouts and is continuously evaluating systems such as Cryptio, Gilded, and other payment and accounting tools.

Meanwhile, the volume of activity in VitaDAO has increased considerably and the volume of polls and requests for consensus through VitaCore around day-to-day operational expense approval has become an impediment to timely operational decisions and a time consuming exercise for VitaCore members.

As an extension to VDP-69, we propose to change the approval authority and spending limits to allow for easier execution as follows:


Working Group expense less than $10,000 USD value equivalent

Previous Limit: $2500 USD value equivalent (VDP-6)

Required: any two working group stewards to approve.

Working Group expense greater than $10,000 USD value equivalent, but less than $25,000 USD

Previous Limit: Between $2500 and $10000 USD value equivalent (VDP-6)

Required: majority vote in VitaCore

Working Group expense greater than $25,000 USD value equivalent, but less than $50,000 USD

Previous Limit: Between $10000 and $25000 USD value equivalent (VDP-6)

Required: Governance proposal and majority vote in Discourse (Phase 2 per VDP-1)

Working Group expense greater than $50,000 USD value equivalent or ANY project involving the Longevity Dealflow funding of projects (even if less than $50k)

Previous Limit: >$50,000 USD value equivalent (VDP-6)

Required: Phase 3 / on-chain governance


If this proposal passes, the Coordination Working Group (formerly the Operations Working Group), shall re-align the signing authorities in the internal expense approval workflow.

Success metrics

  • Better execution times
  • Reduced burden on VitaCore members for non-strategic spending decisions.
  • Agree
  • Agree with revisions (please comment)
  • Disagree

0 voters

1 Like

Would working group expenses in either spec be transparent to the rest of the community?

They would be transparent to the extent they are now - any token holder can ask about any expense of the DAO and we would provide that information. Projects usually have budgets attached to the proposals.

1 Like

I have a few comments regarding bookkeeping and overall transparency. Shortly, I don’t think the DAO expenses are transparent enough presently. On EtherScan, I see hundreds of thousands of VITA being moved around in a single day. What’s it for? Is it compensation for work? Is it project-related transfers? Inquiring about every individual transaction is just too burdensome.

I suggest VitaDAO describes in an accessible format the purpose of every transaction above $10,000 or equivalent.


@rpill Many of the expenses are driven by governance, but unless you specifically ask, the blockchain doesn’t provide enough context as you mention.

Starting in 2023, there will be more frequent reports, as we have been working with vendors to finally have a better reporting module for tagging and itemizing the GL accounts. This will certainly allow for more transparency on expenditures and give you a sense of the costs associated with running the DAO.