diff --git a/proposals/static-delegates.md b/proposals/static-delegates.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..436524b669
--- /dev/null
+++ b/proposals/static-delegates.md
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+# Static Delegates
+
+* [x] Proposed
+* [ ] Prototype: Not Started
+* [ ] Implementation: Not Started
+* [ ] Specification: Not Started
+
+## Summary
+[summary]: #summary
+
+Provide a general-purpose, lightweight callback capability to the C# language.
+
+## Motivation
+[motivation]: #motivation
+
+Today, users have the ability to create callbacks using the `System.Delegate` type. However, these are fairly heavyweight (such as requiring a heap allocation and always having handling for chaining callbacks together).
+
+Additionally, `System.Delegate` does not provide the best interop with unmanaged function pointers, namely due being non-blittable and requiring marshalling anytime it crosses the managed/unmanaged boundary.
+
+With a few minor tweaks, we could provide a new type of delegate that is lightweight, general-purpose, and interops well with native code.
+
+## Detailed design
+[design]: #detailed-design
+
+One would declare a static delegate via the following:
+
+```C#
+static delegate int Func()
+```
+
+One could additionally attribute the declaration with something similar to `System.Runtime.InteropServices.UnmanagedFunctionPointer` so that the calling convention, string marshalling, and set last error behavior can be controlled. NOTE: Using `System.Runtime.InteropServices.UnmanagedFunctionPointer` itself will not work, as it is only usable on Delegates.
+
+The declaration would get translated into an internal representation by the compiler that is similar to the following
+
+```C#
+struct <Func>e__StaticDelegate
+{
+    IntPtr pFunction;
+
+    static int WellKnownCompilerName();
+}
+```
+
+That is to say, it is internally represented by a struct that has a single member of type `IntPtr` (such a struct is blittable and does not incur any heap allocations):
+* The member contains the address of the function that is to be the callback.
+* The type declares a method matching the method signature of the callback.
+* The name of the struct should not be user-constructable (as we do with other internally generated backing structures).
+ * For example: fixed size buffers generate a struct with a name in the format of `<name>e__FixedBuffer` (`<` and `>` are part of the identifier and make the identifier not constructable in C#, but still useable in IL).
+* The name of the method declaration should be a well known name used across all static delegate types (this allows the compiler to know the name to look for when determining the signature).
+
+The value of the static delegate can only be bound to a static method that matches the signature of the callback.
+
+Chaining callbacks together is not supported.
+
+Invocation of the callback would be implemented by the `calli` instruction.
+
+## Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+Static Delegates would not work with existing APIs that use regular delegates (one would need to wrap said static delegate in a regular delegate of the same signature).
+* Given that `System.Delegate` is represented internally as a set of `object` and `IntPtr` fields (http://source.dot.net/#System.Private.CoreLib/src/System/Delegate.cs), it would be possible to allow implicit conversion of a static delegate to a `System.Delegate` that has a matching method signature. It would also be possible to provide an explicit conversion in the opposite direction, provided the `System.Delegate` conformed to all the requirements of being a static delegate.
+
+Additional work would be needed to make Static Delegate readily usable in the core framework.
+
+## Alternatives
+[alternatives]: #alternatives
+
+TBD
+
+## Unresolved questions
+[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions
+
+What parts of the design are still TBD?
+
+## Design meetings
+
+Link to design notes that affect this proposal, and describe in one sentence for each what changes they led to.
+
+