This is a great question and cuts straight to what I think is the heart of this proposal. The current version of AGP-1 is by no means the final iteration of Aragon governance, but rather the next step along the journey to full control of the project by ANT holders.
Per our earlier discussion about Aragon governance, under this version of AGP-1 the Aragon Association has the sole power to put proposals on the ballot but ANT holders have the power to veto proposals. You can read the thread linked above for some of the rationale behind this, but TL;DR this ensures that 1. proposals that the Association does not approve of (let’s call them “bad proposals”) do not end up on the ballot and 2. ANT holders can still exercise their voice about the proposals that do get onto the ballot.
Over time, as we observe how ANT holders participate in the process and gain confidence in their ability to self-govern, more power will be transferred to them. This includes transferring funds and other assets to the Aragon Network for ANT holders to control directly. But this will be a gradual process, and not without additional safeguards to protect against bad proposals.
