The discussion revolved around the introduction of the StrategicAssetManager, a dedicated contract for managing Aave DAO’s strategic assets, including the DAO’s veBAL holding, as proposed by Llamaxyz¹. The contract, which is upgradeable and controlled by Aave’s Short Executor role via governance, will manage the DAO’s assets, participate in governance votes, claim protocol fees and other rewards, and transfer assets among other functions¹.

John_TV_Locke suggested that the DAO should allocate a certain amount of tokens to the committee with a specified goal, and any new allocations should go through governance. He also proposed that assets that can be locked should require optimistic consent². TokenLogic clarified that the ShortExecutor needs to transfer assets from the Treasury to the StrategicAssetManager contract, which can only be done via a governance vote. This segregates strategic assets from non-strategic ones. At launch, the only strategic asset is veBAL, with the possibility of adding sdCRV later³.

The discussion also touched on the assignment of the AssetManager role to an address, with the initial AssetManager likely focusing on GHO liquidity management. If Aave DAO passively holds assets like LSTs, these are better held in the Treasury, not the StrategicAssetManagement contract. If the DAO considers Protocol Owned Liquidity, it could be held in the StrategicAssetManagement contract or a separate one. The DAO's veBAL holding boost can be delegated to another contract, meaning the DAO doesn't need to hold BPTs in the StrategicAssetManagement³. TokenLogic supports assigning the AssetManager role to a multi-sig, but believes more discussion is needed on how the DAO should structure its funds³.