[DAO:b584289] Should DAO Council members have term limits ? [DRAFT]

Governance
1

by 0x247e0896706bb09245549e476257a0a1129db418 (coalition)

Linked Pre-Proposal

Should DAO Council members have term limits ?

Summary

Establish three-year DAO Council terms with mandatory re-election, no limit on renewals, and staggered elections.

Abstract

This proposal introduces three-year DAO Council terms with mandatory periodic re-election and no limit on consecutive terms. The aim is to provide regular accountability while preserving experience and continuity.

Motivation

The DAO Council has significant responsibilities, including oversight of the Executive Arm and approval of strategy and budgets. Its founding rules do not establish fixed terms or a regular re-election schedule.

The linked Poll supported taking this issue forward. During its discussion, several participants supported defined terms and periodic re-election while opposing mandatory breaks and the simultaneous expiry of all Council seats.

Three-year terms would give members time to contribute and maintain working relationships, while requiring renewed community support at a defined interval. Allowing members to stand again preserves the community’s ability to retain experienced people. Staggered elections support continuity and knowledge transfer.

Specification

  1. Term length and renewal

Council members serve three-year terms. Continuing for another term requires re-election through the existing DAO Council election process.

  1. Eligibility for re-election

Current and future Council members may stand for re-election without a limit on consecutive terms. No mandatory break applies between terms.

  1. Starting date for current Council positions

For this policy, 6 February 2025—the closing date of the original successful Council hiring votes—is the proposed common starting date for the current Council’s first terms. This applies to all five current positions, including the position Monotributista filled after maraoz resigned. Adoption of this policy does not restart those terms.

This date may be revised in the final binding Governance Proposal following community discussion.

  1. Staggered elections

Council elections will take place in separate rounds to preserve continuity. The Council may prepare a proposed schedule.

  1. Existing processes

Elections, resignations, and early removal continue through the existing DAO processes.

  1. Adoption

These rules take effect only if the final binding Governance Proposal passes.

Conclusion

Defined terms and mandatory re-election give the community a regular opportunity to renew each Council member’s mandate. Three-year terms, continued eligibility for re-election, and staggered elections combine that accountability with continuity and experience.

References

Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO

View this proposal on Snapshot

1 Like
2

My Recommendations

1. Term Length and Renewal

2 years instead of 3 years.

Given the rapidly evolving nature of the industry, a three-year term may be excessively long. A two-year term strikes a balance between continuity, accountability, and adaptability.

2. Eligibility for Re-election

As stated in the proposal.

3. Commencement Date of Current Council Terms

6 February 2025, based on the research and findings presented.

4. Staggered Elections

To ensure institutional continuity and avoid replacing the entire Council simultaneously, I propose introducing a staggered election system.

The order in which Council members face re-election will be determined through a transparent lottery, with each position designated as Council Seat 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5.

The election schedule will be as follows:

  • 6 February 2027: Council Seats 1 and 2

  • 6 August 2027: Council Seat 3

  • 6 February 2028: Council Seat 4

  • 6 August 2028: Council Seat 5

  • 6 February 2029: Council Seats 1 and 2 (beginning of the next cycle)

This schedule will repeat every two years, with elections taking place at six-month intervals.

This structure ensures that no more than two Council seats are contested during any scheduled election, preserving institutional knowledge and operational stability.

5. Special Circumstances and Vacancies

In circumstances where a Council member may need to be removed for cause, a formal Council vote should be conducted, requiring a minimum of three affirmative votes out of five Council members (3/5) to approve the removal.

Such circumstances may include serious misconduct, persistent underperformance, or failure to fulfil Council responsibilities.

In the event of a resignation, removal, or other unexpected vacancy, a special election should be held to fill the affected Council seat. The Council member that has been voted out should be allowed to stand for elections immediately again, to decide if he/she has been wrongfully dismissed.

The newly elected member will serve only the remainder of the original seat’s term, rather than beginning a new two-year term.

This ensures that unexpected vacancies do not disrupt the established staggered election schedule.

1 Like
3

I support the direction of this proposal, particularly mandatory re-elections without forced term limits. However, there are some important details that should be addressed before a final binding vote.

What happens if an election fails to meet the voting threshold? Who establishes and enforces the staggered election schedule? What happens when a term expires without a successful election? Do they run on a Yes/No or do they run against other candidates?

These aren’t reasons to reject the proposal, but they are questions worth answering now. We’ve seen how unresolved details can become reasons for people to vote against an otherwise worthwhile proposal. I’d rather see those concerns addressed early than have them used to derail it later.