The Operating Manual (v0.4.2)
In this section we will describe the current governance proposal process of the Collective. It will evolve over time. The authoritative version is maintained here on GitHub.
Bicameral Governance
The Collective is governed by two Houses:
- Token House handles most formal governance processes: protocol upgrades, OP allocation, representative elections, and proposal approvals.
- Citizens’ House governs the distribution of Retro Funding and can veto proposals like protocol upgrades and inflation changes to protect the Collective from plutocratic or short-sighted decisions.
They were designed to serve different roles, and to check and balance each other’s influence.
| House | Who votes? | Main Responsibilities | Voting System | Veto Powers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Token House | OP holders & delegates | Protocol upgrades, treasury decisions, elections, governance proposals | On-chain Governor contract | Can veto some Citizen-led proposals |
| Citizens’ House | EAS-attested Citizens | Retro Funding, mission scoping, long-term legitimacy | Snapshot (off-chain) | Can veto upgrades or inflation proposals passed by Token House |
Together, this forms a bicameral system that balances technical governance with public goods. Certain proposals (like maintenance upgrades) require both Houses to participate, and others (like Retro Funding) are solely in the Citizens' domain.
Governance Toolkit
| Tool | Description |
|---|---|
| Token House Governance Contract | On-chain voting for Token House proposals |
| Optimism Governance Portal | Vote and delegate OP on-chain |
| Citizens' House Snapshot | Vote interface for Citizens' House |
| Optimism Forum | Proposal discussion and feedback |
| Discord | Informal governance chat |
| Grants GitHub | Foundation Mission proposals and discussion |
| Charmverse | Home of the Optimism Grants Council |
These tools may change as governance evolves.
Proposal Process
Anyone may submit a governance proposal if it fits one of the valid types (listed below) and follows the voting process.
Most proposals follow a three-week cycle:
-
Week 1–2: Feedback and Review [Draft]
- Proposals are posted to the Forum for community feedback.
- Must be formatted per the standard proposal template.
- Four top 100 delegates or four Citizens must explicitly approve for the proposal to move to vote.
- They indicate this by commenting: 'I am an Optimism [delegate/Citizen] [link], and I believe this proposal is ready to move to a vote.'
-
Week 3: Voting
- Voting lasts 7 days via Optimism Governance Portal (Token House) or Snapshot (Citizens’ House).
- Snapshot of voting power is taken at the start of the voting period.
- Quorum and approval thresholds depend on the Proposal Type.
Veto Process
Certain proposals can be vetoed by the other House:
| Proposal Origin | Veto House | Threshold |
|---|---|---|
| Token House (e.g. Protocol Upgrade) | Citizens' House | 30% of Citizens |
| Citizens' House Proposal | Token House | 30% of votable OP supply |
Vetoes are a serious mechanism, reserved for malicious proposals or cases of governance capture.
Valid Proposal Types
| Proposal Type | Proposing House | Vote Duration | Quorum | Approval | Veto Rights |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Governance Fund (Missions) | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 51% | — |
| Protocol / Governor Upgrade | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 76% | Citizens' House |
| Maintenance Upgrade | Both Houses | 1w optimistic vote | — | — | Both Houses (12%) |
| Inflation Adjustment | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 76% | Citizens' House |
| Director Removal (OP Foundation) | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 76% | — |
| Treasury Appropriation | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 51% | — |
| Rights Protections | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 51% | — |
| Code of Conduct Violations | Either | 2w review + 1w optimistic vote | — | — | Corresponding House (12%) |
| Representative Removal | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 51% | — |
| Structure Dissolution | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 51% | — |
| Ratification | Both Houses | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 51% | — |
| Reflection Period | Token House | 2w review + 1w vote | 30% | 51% | — |
See templates this template for proposal types.
Retro Funding
Retro Funding Missions are managed by the Citizens’ House and follow these steps:
- Scoping: Vote on budget + mission scope.
- Application: Projects apply via OP Atlas.
- Review: Applications reviewed for eligibility.
- Voting: Citizens vote on impact and allocate rewards.
- Disbursement: Grants distributed to winning projects.
- Compliance: Projects complete KYC and compliance review.
For example, Retro Funding in 2025 includes:
- Onchain Builders Mission: Up to 8M OP to support Superchain adoption and interop.
- Dev Tooling Mission: Up to 8M OP for foundational open-source infrastructure.
Find more information about the season here.
Experimentation with Citizenship
The Citizens’ House was created to:
- Counterbalance Token House plutocracy
- Reward long-term public goods
- Increase resilience via diverse representation
Experiments with Guest Voters are ongoing. The Citizen Attestation Schema tracks active Citizens.
Experiments follow this principles:
- Measurable inputs + outcomes
- Short feedback cycles
- Reversibility (e.g. guest voter rounds)
Implementation & Administration
The Optimism Foundation:
- Moderates proposals and enforces submission requirements
- Monitors quorum and thresholds
- Administers emergency upgrades and manages network operations
- Routes approved proposals to implementation
- Collects compliance information
Over time, its role is expected to decentralize. Security-critical upgrades are enacted by the Security Council (SC).
Change Process
The manual evolves alongside governance. Each release is versioned and published here. Future updates may include:
- New Proposal Types
- Expanded veto powers
- Full community maintenance
Only the removal of a Proposal Type requires a governance vote.