{
  "@context": {
    "CIP100": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#",
    "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm",
    "body": {
      "@id": "CIP100:body",
      "@context": {
        "references": {
          "@id": "CIP100:references",
          "@container": "@set",
          "@context": {
            "GovernanceMetadata": "CIP100:GovernanceMetadataReference",
            "Other": "CIP100:OtherReference",
            "label": "CIP100:reference-label",
            "uri": "CIP100:reference-uri",
            "referenceHash": {
              "@id": "CIP100:referenceHash",
              "@context": {
                "hashDigest": "CIP100:hashDigest",
                "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm"
              }
            }
          }
        },
        "comment": "CIP100:comment",
        "externalUpdates": {
          "@id": "CIP100:externalUpdates",
          "@context": {
            "title": "CIP100:update-title",
            "uri": "CIP100:uri"
          }
        }
      }
    },
    "authors": {
      "@id": "CIP100:authors",
      "@container": "@set",
      "@context": {
        "name": "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name",
        "witness": {
          "@id": "CIP100:witness",
          "@context": {
            "witnessAlgorithm": "CIP100:witnessAlgorithm",
            "publicKey": "CIP100:publicKey",
            "signature": "CIP100:signature"
          }
        }
      }
    }
  },
  "authors": [],
  "body": {
    "comment": "DRep Voting Rationale — Vote: No\n\nThis proposal reflects a strong commitment to expanding access to treasury funds for community builders, a goal that is central to Cardano’s decentralized future. It respects constitutional safeguards by applying the 2.69B ADA participation threshold and excludes founding entity proposals.\n\nHowever, I am voting No based on a key governance concern: the risk of duplication with the Intersect budget. Given that Intersect has been closely involved in assembling their own budget proposal which is currently live up for voting on chain and close to being ratified. My concern with approving this proposal is getting a proposal funded twice. Of course, for that to happen it would need a withdrawal action too.\n\nAdditional Perspective on Treasury Withdrawal Structure\n\n- As a DRep, I also wish to express my broader view on the upcoming Treasury Withdrawals structure:\n\n- I am strongly in favor of greater granularity in funding decisions to allow more nuanced and accountable governance.\n\n- Although I value pragmatism in governance operations, I am most comfortable with Option D (five brackets from Ekklesia), which strikes a strong balance between decentralization and operational feasibility for Intersect. It might be argued that this discredits Intersect's budget process, but I prefer to be on the safe side and get additional results, especially this being Cardano's 1st budget.\n\n- I would also be willing to review 39 individual proposals (Option E) if necessary, despite the heavier governance load, because it offers the maximum clarity. Option C (two support brackets split across 2025 and 2026) is acceptable to me too. Sticking to D, though.\n\nVOTE0012"
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256"
}