Besides negligible added smart contract risk, there may also be opportunity cost.
Staking up to 50% of each eligible treasury asset seems a bit high to me given that the space is so young. It's fine if the lock period is sufficiently short.
Opportunity cost may include unknown unknowns - for example, we may want to disband some Klima/USDC for liquidity initiatives, or stake Klima/USDC elsewhere, depending on C3's fate.
Depending on the lock period, this may be a bigger cost than expected.
A 60 day lock would have a very different risk analysis than a 1 year lock.
Given the "up to 50% of each eligible treasury asset" bullet point, I recommend adding Policy's lock period intentions to the KIP to clarify opportunity cost risk.
I would also prefer the range of "up to 50% of eligible treasury assets" to be narrowed a bit to the intended range.
I am voting "for" with the hope that my comments are taken into consideration when crafting the KIP.