[Proposal] Rotating the Composition of Aurora DAO Councils

AuroraDAO
1

Abstract

Aurora DAO currently has 13 councils who have served for a long period without changes in composition.

This proposal suggests updating the composition while keeping the same total number of councils, to ensure that governance reflects the most active and relevant contributors in the present-day Aurora ecosystem.

Motivation

Aurora DAO was established to embody decentralization, transparency, and alignment with the ecosystem’s needs. While its current 13 councils have provided long-standing governance stability, the environment in which Aurora operates has evolved substantially. This evolution makes it essential to realign the DAO’s leadership composition with today’s realities.

Key points motivating this proposal:

Evolving Ecosystem Landscape

The Aurora ecosystem has shifted significantly since the current council was formed, moving from a core-driven structure to a diverse network of active projects and contributors. Many of today’s key drivers of growth — dApps, infrastructure teams, and community initiatives — were not part of the original governance representation but now play an essential role. Governance should reflect this new balance of influence and activity.

Need for Relevant Representation
Effective governance relies on the presence of those who are actively shaping and engaging with the ecosystem. Without updating the council to include current high-impact actors, there is a risk of strategic decisions being made without the insights of those most closely connected to current developments and challenges. This refresh ensures that decision-making aligns with present-day realities.

Balancing Continuity and Renewal
While institutional knowledge is important for stability, an unchanged composition over a long period can limit adaptability and slow the integration of fresh perspectives. By keeping the same number of seats but updating who occupies them, the DAO can retain governance stability while bringing in new expertise and ideas. This approach avoids the downsides of both full turnover and indefinite incumbency.

Strengthening Legitimacy and Engagement
Updating the council to include active ecosystem contributors sends a strong signal of openness, fairness, and merit-based recognition. It demonstrates that governance positions are not static privileges but living roles that evolve with community needs. Such inclusivity strengthens trust in the DAO and encourages ongoing participation from a broader set of stakeholders.

Specification

  1. Maintain the total number of councils — 13 seats in total.

  2. Voting Rule — simple majority 7 out of 13 to approve.

  3. Refresh the composition by replacing selected members to include representatives from currently active and impactful ecosystem participants.

  4. Selection process to be agreed upon internally within the DAO, focusing on merit, proven activity, and ecosystem contributions.

Implementation Plan

  • Step 1: Submit this proposal on-chain and approve it through Aurora DAO governance voting in accordance with existing DAO procedures.

  • Step 2: Upon approval, execute a single on-chain governance action that simultaneously removes the retiring council members and appoints the newly selected council members, while preserving the total number of council seats at thirteen (13).

  • Step 3: Publish the finalized council composition and activate the updated governance configuration.

The list of proposed Delegates

  1. NEAR Foundation - ecosystem partner

  2. Aurora Labs - main developer

  3. Consensys - DeFi leading developer

  4. HackVS - VS and Aurora initial investor

  5. Lemniscap - VS and Aurora initial investor

  6. Proximity - ecosystem liquidity provider

  7. Infura - leading infrastructure developer

  8. NEAR One - main NEAR blockchain developer

  9. Hot Wallet - ecosystem wallet developer

  10. HAPI - ecosystem security protocol

  11. CarbyFi - Aurora virtual chain project

  12. Optima - Aurora virtual chain project

  13. Zubair - Aurora community member

3 Likes
2

Thank you for the proposal.

I would note that this is something that should have been done a long time ago, particularly in light of the governance model changes that @Alex wrote about roughly six months ago. Since then, he shifted his focus more deeply toward NEAR Intents, which has delivered genuinely phenomenal results.

Regarding the councils: HOT and HAPI are effectively duplicates, as both share the same co-founders. Notably, HAPI has already received a grant from Aurora DAO

As for Proximity, there may be a potential conflict of interest, given that Aurora DAO previously issued them a grant. A similar consideration applies to NEAR One, which—together with Aurora Labs operates within the House of Stake.

In practice, NEAR One, Proximity, Aurora Labs can be viewed as affiliated within the NEAR Foundation , making transparency and independence in governance especially important.

That said, it is genuinely positive that the decision was made to actively engage members of the community rather than keeping the process closed.

I would actually suggest removing teams directly affiliated with NEAR Foundation from the councils altogether and instead bringing in independent, well-known KOLs as councils—for example, Vitalik Buterin, Yakovenko, Mert, and other respected web3 voices.

This was one of the ideas discussed last time: to bring recognized KOLs into Aurora DAO council roles in order to strengthen legitimacy, visibility, and independence.

Illia and @Alex , I do believe it’s worth seriously thinking about this approach. Otherwise, there is a real risk that this once again becomes a kind of closed council chat, where participants need to be repeatedly chased just to reach quorum and get votes through.

Bringing in independent KOLs would not only reduce perceived conflicts of interest but also improve credibility, engagement, and the overall governance signal to the wider community.