Celo Regional Council H1 2025

Governance Governance Proposals
, ,
1

Proposal Key Aspects

  • Receiver Entity: Celo Governance
  • Status: [DRAFT]
  • Title: Celo Regional Council H1 2025
  • Authors: Celo Regional DAOs
  • Type of Request: Funding
  • Funding Request: We are requesting from the Community Fund $478,500 plus 50,000 Celo

Summary

This proposal emerged through a collaborative process involving all established Regional DAOs in the Celo ecosystem, as well as several stakeholders and individuals —each of whom supports this approach and recognizes its potential to solidify a globally interconnected yet locally autonomous network of Regional DAOs.

It seeks Celo Community approval to provide transitional funding for these DAOs in the first half of 2025, ensuring they can continue operations despite near-term resource constraints. This bridge period covers the runway until Celo’s Governance 2.0 is fully established following the L2 migration. Under this framework, each Regional DAO will keep advancing Celo’s mission of financial inclusion, sustainability, and innovation, operating within a unified yet locally autonomous structure.

Key Objectives

  1. Reinforce Localized Impact: Direct, transparent funding to each Regional DAO.
  2. A self-governing body: the creation of the “Regional Council”, a new Governance structure to promote, and protect community rights, as well as to align Celo Regional efforts
  3. Independent Yet Collaborative: Each DAO retains its autonomy while the Celo Regional Council fosters synergy, accountability, and cross-DAOs knowledge exchange.
  4. Close Coordination with the Celo Foundation: Ensures DAOs remain a unique differentiator for Celo and align seamlessly with the Foundation’s long-term strategy.
  5. Prepare for Governance 2.0: Piloting enhanced coordination frameworks, on-chain tools, and accountability mechanisms that can scale post-L2 migration.

Motivation

Regional DAOs have been a hallmark of Celo’s commitment to local empowerment and community-driven innovation. Building on their proven track record of bridging blockchain technology to local realities, this proposal aims to sustain and enhance Regional DAOs throughout the first half of 2025. Crucially, these six months will bridge our current structure into Celo’s Governance 2.0 era, aligning with the coming L2 migration and the beginning of the impact era.

Originally incubated by the Celo Foundation, Regional DAOs (DAOs) have grown into entities that work together to catalyze adoption, foster inclusion, and drive innovation in each region, reflecting the unique social, economic, and cultural contexts that define them. The intention is to strengthen on-chain accountability, ensure fair funding for impactful projects, and create a globally connected yet locally autonomous network of DAOs.

Big Picture: Why Celo Regional DAOs?

  • Unique Potential: Each region has distinct market conditions, regulatory environments, and cultural nuances. DAOs empower these communities to shape solutions that truly fit local needs.
  • Mission Alignment: Regional DAOs embody Celo’s wider goals of financial inclusion, sustainability, and innovation, deploying stablecoins, ReFi initiatives, and novel governance models to close economic gaps.
  • Celo’s Strategic Advantage: By scaling local insights, we create a global knowledge loop, where best practices from Latin America might spark ideas in Africa, or a sustainability pilot in Europe could inspire climate action in Asia.

Specifications

Core Principles & Values

  1. Autonomous Action
  • Regional DAOs maintain their own operations and decision-making processes, agilely responding to local opportunities and challenges.
  • This autonomy ensures bottom-up innovation consistent with Celo’s ethos of decentralization.
  1. Transparency
  • Mandatory use of on-chain accountability tools (e.g., multi-sig wallets, open proposals) ensures funds are used responsibly.
  • Each DAO commits to regular, publicly accessible reporting of milestones and financial transactions.
  1. Inclusion & Respect
  • All regions practice a diverse and supportive approach to community-building, prioritizing wide participation and local representation.
  • Active measures to onboard new contributors, bridging skill gaps, and fostering a collaborative culture.

4.Impact-Driven Collaboration

  • Contributors earn trust and responsibility through demonstrated impact rather than formal hierarchies.
  • DAOs utilize local bounty systems, open calls for proposals, and transparent contributor reward mechanisms.

Long-Term Vision (Aligned with Celo Foundation Strategy)

  • Collaboration with Major Stakeholders: Each DAO keeps close ties with the Foundation, Opera, Mento, Valora, Prezenti, and other ecosystem partners to sync on progress, share feedback, and coordinate releases.
  • Unified, Not Fragmented: Regular cross-DAOs communication helps avoid siloed development, ensuring that relevant insights and resources are shared.
  • Bridging to Governance 2.0: The DAOs will actively shape how local communities integrate with the upcoming L2 environment, helping define governance processes that reflect real-world user needs.

Frameworks for Decentralized Coordination, Alignment, and Accountability

  • Regional Council:
    • One representative per DAO who holds responsibility for higher-level coordination.
    • Bylaws Delivery: A complete set of bylaws—including responsibilities, code of conduct, and governance rules—will be published three months after this proposal passes, setting clarity for the 6 months.
    • Ensures no single group dominates; each region has an equal voice in cross-DAO decisions.
  • On-Chain Reputation & Tools:
    • Encouraging a transparent, data-driven approach to measure contributions and outcomes.
    • Reduces reliance on intermediaries and fosters direct relationships between the DAOs and Celo Governance.
  • Compliance Structures:
    • Each DAO is responsible for its actions/behaviors. This current DAOanization does not oversee activities nor is responsible for the application of resources, but rather works open source to provide suggestions on best practices and accountability.
  • Ambassadors & Cross-DAOs Program
    • Ambassador Program: Potential founders must first prove their commitment through small-scale local initiatives, fDAOing trust within the community.
    • Cross-DAOs Projects: Encourages region-to-region collaboration on events, project pilots, or grassroots adoption campaigns.

Financial Security & Fair Resource Distribution

  • Periodic Funding Cycle: This proposal covers H1 2025, after which we anticipate a new round of funding aligned with the lessons learned and the final form of Governance 2.0.
  • Direct Allocation to DAOs: Each DAO receives an agreed-upon amount directly, retaining discretion over local spending while adhering to transparency policies.
  • No Council Ops Overhead: All requested funds will go directly to the DAOs, with no separate management fee imposed during the first six months. We believe it is crucial to first demonstrate that this council is capable of delivering value to the community while also identifying the roles necessary to effectively manage and execute these initiatives.

Celo Regional Council Structure

Purpose & Overview

The Celo Regional Council is the cohesive layer uniting every local DAO, ensuring consistent governance, resource sharing, and alignment with the Celo Foundation. Each participating DAO elects 1 representative.

Council Structure

  • 1 Representative per DAO: Each regional community designates a trusted individual to safeguard its interests and make key decisions. The individual must be an active part of the organisation’s core team.
  • Multisig Representation: A Council multisig (details to be finalized) may execute important cross-DAOs or ecosystem-level actions, as well as receive and distribute funds.
  • Monthly Community Calls: Virtual meetings open to all Celo community but led by the Council reps, providing transparency, synergy, and real-time decision-making. All calls are recorded and made publicly available.

Representative Responsibilities

  1. Stake Reputation: Council members publicly uphold their region’s credibility and must maintain the highest standards of transparency.
  2. Maintain Accountability: Clear financial records, a traceable decision-making process, and documented votes or proposals.
  3. Strategic Alignment: Regular communication with the Celo Foundation and ecosystem stakeholders (e.g., Opera, Mento, Valora, Prezenti, cLabs, etc) to ensure local initiatives complement global objectives.
  4. Onboarding & Governance: Collaborate on welcoming new regions, updating governance processes, and ensuring inclusive participation.
  5. Conflict Disclosure: Immediately reveal any personal or professional interests that could bias Council decisions.

Code of Conduct

  • No Hidden Agendas: All discussions are publicly documented, ensuring that no decisions occur behind closed doors.
  • Declare Conflicts of Interest: Representatives must proactively disclose any overlapping roles or obligations.
  • Revocation Clause: While DAOs retain membership, their representative can be replaced by their local DAOs and other Council Members if they violate transparency rules, become inactive, or fail to meet performance expectations.

Membership Requirements

For a Regional DAO to hold a Council seat, it must demonstrate:

  1. Proven Track Record: A history of successful ecosystem initiatives, community building, or adoption efforts.
  2. Decentralized Team Structure: Multiple active contributors, ensuring no single point of failure.
  3. Consistency & Engagement: Regular updates and meaningful participation in the broader Celo community.
  4. Commitment to Council Values: Willingness to uphold transparency, ethical conduct, and collaborative spirit.

Basic Governance Framework

  • The Council voting process is yet to be established, but it will initially operate in a simple manner: a decision will require 4 out of 7 votes to be approved, which is more than 50%.
  • The Celo Council Multisig will initially be operated by 5 members, requiring 3 signatures to move funds. This ensures streamlined decision-making without silencing community input.
    • Celo Africa
    • Celo Colombia
    • Celo EU
    • CeLatam
    • Celo Mexico

Example of Operation
For instance, if Celo EU requires its allocation, the following steps will be taken:

  1. Celo EU provides a basic “handbook” and a detailed “budget.”
  2. The council votes on the proposal, requiring 4 out of 7 votes in favour of approval.
  3. Once approved, the multisig signers will execute the transactions.

Bylaws Delivery

A comprehensive set of bylaws—expanding on the code of conduct, membership rules, and decision-making protocols—will be published three months after this proposal’s passage, giving the community time to align with and review the framework.

What Would Change?

1. Unified Yet Flexible Structure
Current DAOs retain autonomy over local operations, but Council-led monthly calls align broader strategies, ensuring minimal duplication of effort.

2. Systematic Onboarding
Any future DAOs formation (post-Governance 2.0) follows a two-step path, ensuring new DAOs originate from grassroots engagement rather than top-down assignment:

  • Ambassador Phase: Individuals prove their commitment and contribution.
  • DAO Establishment: The Council provides guidelines, ensuring accountability and proven alignment with Celo’s ethos.

3. Enhanced Accountability & Collaboration

  • Public logs of multisig transactions, a standardized framework for KPI metrics, and joint proposals across DAOs promote a high-trust environment.
  • Regular community calls and open records reduce the potential for silos or misalignment.

Metrics & KPIs

Council-Centric Framework

Upon approval of this proposal, the Regional Council will establish a comprehensive KPI framework that covers:

  1. Council-Level KPIs:
  • Governance & Transparency: Measuring how effectively the Council coordinates, communicates, and accounts for resource distribution.
  1. Standard DAO KPIs:
  • Common Metrics applicable across all DAOs (e.g., basic adoption stats or community growth) to ensure consistent ecosystem-wide reporting.
  • On-Chain & Off-Chain Indicators that reflect overall health and progress.
  1. Region-Specific KPIs:
  • Tailored to each DAOs unique scope, level of maturity, and local initiatives (e.g. stablecoin adoption, specialised partnerships).
  • Derived in collaboration with each DAOs community, reflecting local realities and priorities.

Immediate Council KPIs
During this bridge period (H1 2025), the Regional Council will focus on the following core metrics to ensure transparent governance:

  1. Transparency & Accountability
  • Reporting: Quarterly Council updates published on-chain or in an open repository, detailing overall expenditures, progress, and upcoming milestones.
  • Multisig Transaction Logs: A publicly accessible record of all fund allocations executed by the Council to maintain trust and signal best practices for each Regional DAOs.
  1. Governance Engagement
  • Participation: Tracking the number of active Council representatives on monthly calls, the frequency of votes, and attendance in global Celo governance discussions.
  • Community Feedback Integration: Document how Council decisions incorporate community input—especially from DAOs members, stakeholders and the Celo Foundation.

Post-Approval Process

  1. Finalising DAOs-Specific KPIs: Once the proposal is passed, the Council will collaborate with each Regional DAOs to define both common and custom metrics that best reflect their activities and maturity.
  2. Ongoing Refinement: The Council will periodically refine these KPIs based on community feedback, shifting ecosystem needs, and the evolution toward Governance 2.0.

In this way, the Regional Council fosters an ecosystem-wide culture of measurable impact, allowing each DAO to demonstrate tangible value while preserving local autonomy and innovation.

Current Status

This initiative—the Celo Regional Council—is a new governance structure that does not yet exist in the ecosystem. It is designed to unify and coordinate Regional DAOs under a shared framework of transparency and collaboration, providing a forward-looking alternative to past standalone structures.

However, each participating Regional DAO has previously submitted independent proposals and delivered reports on their activities. To review past achievements and insights that shaped this new initiative, please see the following references:

These existing Regional DAOs have already demonstrated local impact within their respective communities, and this proposal aims to reinforce and advance those efforts by establishing a more robust, cohesive governance model.

Council Voting

The council has already voted on two key topics using the basic governance framework defined:

  1. Including Celo Latam Budget:
    The first resolution was negative. The council decided not to include Celo Latam’s budget in the proposal, as their current treasury is sufficient for the next 6 months. The council perceives this as a major threat to the well-being of this proposal. This is a transitional proposal, and the focus is on supporting Regional DAOs with more immediate funding needs.
  2. Moving Forward with the Proposal:
    The second resolution was affirmative. The first vote of the Celo Regional Council met the established requirements, with a majority of 4 out of 7 votes or more.

As a result:

  • The budget for Celo Latam is excluded from the scope of the proposal. However, they still have representation in the council and retain the possibility of presenting their own budget proposal, which would need to be approved by the Celo community.
  • The proposal has been published on the Celo Forum.

This marks a significant milestone in establishing a unified governance model for Regional DAOs, leveraging the basic governance framework to ensure fair decision-making and alignment across the ecosystem.

Timeline and Milestones

Month 1: Setup

  • Disburse funds to the Regional Council multisig wallet.
  • Distribute funds to Regional DAOs after the handbook and budget submission.
  • Schedule the first monthly community call.

Month 2: Operations Begin

  • Hold the second Council meeting to review progress.

Month 3: Midway Review

  • Publish bylaws and governance rules.
  • Define an ambassador program framework
  • Publish the first quarterly report with updates on progress and expenditures.
  • Host the third community call.

Month 4: Scaling Up

  • Expand the Ambassador Program and encourage cross-region collaboration.
  • Start gathering KPIs from each Regional DAO.

Month 5: Governance Preparation

  • Develop frameworks for Governance 2.0 integration.
  • Host a feedback-focused community call.

Month 6: Final Report

  • Publish the second quarterly report summarizing outcomes and challenges.
  • Finalize plans for H2 2025 strategy and funding.
  • Host a community call.

Budget

A total of $478,500 in cUSD (or equivalent) will be used for financing six active Regional DAOs, plus an extra 50,000 Celo to onboard Potential Ambassadors for the first half of 2025, as follows:

  • Celo Africa: $170,000
  • Celo Europe: $140,000
  • CeLatam: $0
  • Celo Colombia: $57,500
  • Celo Philippines: $30,000
  • Koh Celo: $31,000
  • Celo Mexico: $50,000

(For reference, each Regional DAOs total budget for 2024 is shown below. The current proposal focuses on H1 2025 needs only.)

  • Celo Africa: $311,200
  • Celo Europe: $246,250
  • CeLatam: $180,000
  • Koh Celo: $59,850*
  • Celo Colombia: $38,000*
  • Celo Philippines: $35,000*
  • Celo Mexico: $2,000*

*These DAOs operated for less than a year, most for less than 6 months.

Please check the Regional DAOs detailed budget here for a detailed breakdown of their budget and activities. Note that some handbooks are still missing and must be submitted by the respective Regional DAO before receiving their budget.

Payment Terms

Upon proposal approval, the total budget will be deposited to the Celo Regional Council Multisig in a single transaction from the Community Fund. From there, Regional DAOs will be able to request their budget after presenting the required documentation, handbook and budget allocation.

  • Celo Regional Council Multisig Wallet for receiving funds:: 0x90860C778a8A69380376BAab6ac7Fec5daff4Ab5

Regional DAOs Multisig Wallets:

  • Celo Africa: 0xeF88FB545C62226EF0E3304aE411dcCb865319Ee
  • CeLatam: 0x38DBAB5C651F352C8f5F765fDA292E9B92d850Ff
  • Celo EU: 0x357438e4Df52288a137B955E3401E9C1EAf8AF17
  • Celo Colombia: 0x6C6Dc3D4869d9812d80600B9F7f291e13Ee73D49
  • Celo Philippines: 0xe5A68a7C29Dd1F9a4d256704e26eC18D090edd88
  • KohCelo: 0x2e598Ab8484c8F5a115b06bBAc2C2Ae8Ab29bf41
  • Celo Mexico: 0x795df83a989c74832b2D108FF8200989B59FbaCf
  • Celo South Korea: Representation is suspended until they request reactivation.

Conclusion

The Regional Council embodies Celo’s vision of a decentralised yet collaborative ecosystem, weaving together local autonomy and global alignment. With Celo Foundation support, the Council guarantees every region’s voice is heard and anchored in transparent, on-chain governance.

Over the next six months, it will serve as a critical bridge to Governance 2.0, reinforcing local initiatives and shaping a more cohesive, inclusive L2 future for Celo. By approving this proposal and the accompanying $478,500 in cUSD plus 50.000 $Celo funding request, we collectively invest in the success of six distinct Regional DAOs, leveraging their local expertise to enrich and strengthen the entire Celo ecosystem.

We invite the entire Celo community—developers, stakeholders, and newcomers alike—to review, refine, and support this vital step in decentralised collaboration. Together, we will foster a fairer, more sustainable blockchain-powered world.

Team

Each Regional Council will be composed of one representative from each Regional DAOanization.

Currently, there are a total of 8 representative seats. Representatives will initially not receive any compensation. Attached is the list of the initial Regional Council Members:

  • Celo Africa: Daniel, Lead; 0x4827Acd22429C1832980b4039f144b40311D9261
  • CeLatam: Cristobal Pereira, Lead; 0xDC198642f5df2917380850Ce94F57B5f70eED3AB
  • Celo EU: Joan de Ramón Brunet, Lead; 0x5d1ed874ea2f4269c2e1D075973c7fdb7b39154A
  • Celo Colombia: Ana (0xflypeztic), Coms & Marketing; 0x9F75582d2bE13b5EE454161EE394daadA8B39efa
  • Celo Philippines: Luis Buenaventura, Lead; 0x47d544473819299B2b7f579b27E10220268eaD1D
  • KohCelo: Vow, Advisor; 0xb791cd0A3501e60798Cb477FD69406F5422BB25c
  • Celo Mexico: Gerry Alvarez, Lead; 0xF6320E6195A816E44F9599F322D489cAbbC45D24t
  • Celo South Korea: Representation is suspended until they request reactivation.

The Celo Council Multisig will initially be operated by 5 members, requiring 3 signatures to move funds. This ensures streamlined decision-making without silencing community input.

:old_key:Multisig Signers

  • Celo Colombia: Ana (0xflypeztic), Coms & Marketing; 0x9F75582d2bE13b5EE454161EE394daadA8B39efa
  • Celo Africa:Daniel, Lead; 0x4827Acd22429C1832980b4039f144b40311D9261
  • CeLatam: Cristobal Pereira, Lead; 0xDC198642f5df2917380850Ce94F57B5f70eED3AB
  • Celo EU: Joan de Ramón Brunet, Lead; 0x5d1ed874ea2f4269c2e1D075973c7fdb7b39154A
  • Celo Mexico: Gerry Alvarez, Lead; 0xF6320E6195A816E44F9599F322D489cAbbC45D24

Additional Support/Resources

All handbooks, budget breakdowns, team details, and activity outlines for each DAO can be found at the link below. Please note that some DAOs are still finalizing their inputs, and updated information may be provided in the coming days.

22 Likes
2

Excited for the cross-regional collaboration, together, @CeloEurope, @CeloAfricaDAO, @CeLatamOrg, @Celo_Col, @CeloMexico, @celoPHDAO, and @KohCelo are uniting to amplify our voices and multiply our impact cross-borders.

We noticed the report link is missing for us. Could it be possible to please update our link to the first report:

7 Likes
3

Good luck!
What about other regionals like us? why no one reached out to us to discuss this opportunity? or what we should do to be including in this initiative?

9 Likes
4

This is so good!

Let’s go Regens! Can’t wait to convert the Mexican population into Celonians!


Kudos, on the orchestration on this!

8 Likes
5

Fully in support of this proposal! It’s inspiring to see the Celo Regional Council take decentralized governance to the next level by ensuring equal representation for regions and empowering communities with direct, transparent funding.

The emphasis on this model is a game-changer bridging immediate actions while promoting shared power across the ecosystem. This approach not only decentralizes decision-making but also fuels innovation from the ground up.

I’m particularly excited about how this proposal strengthens collaboration across regions like Africa, Europe, Latin America, and beyond.

Let’s make this happen

9 Likes
6

Hey @CeloArabia ! Thank you so much for your question. I think it’s an excellent starting point for opening a new conversation and integrating fresh feedback into this proposal.

The following answer reflects my personal perspective, and I would love to hear other people’s thoughts on this.

The simple answer to your question is that there is currently a 50k Celo budget allocated for bankrolling specific initiatives and certain regions, like the ones you mentioned.

However, we’re in a transitional phase with many moving parts. A new governance framework is being developed, and there’s a need to better understand and improve the onboarding process for ambassadors, followed by the establishment of new Regional DAOs (transitioning from ambassador-led initiatives to DAOs). These are just some examples of areas that require further refinement and development.

One of the key topics of this proposal is ensuring sufficient resources to continue supporting existing Regional DAOs that have demonstrated success in previous seasons, while also onboarding smaller, emerging ones—such as your initiative.

Perhaps the current 50k budget might be too low, and we should consider requesting additional resources to properly support newcomers. Other regions, like Celo Canada and Celo India, are also facing similar challenges.

I encourage you to join the Telegram channel to discuss this topic further with other Regional DAOs or, if you prefer, continue the conversation here. In both cases, the discussion remains in the public sphere for transparency. Additionally, I recommend preparing your own reports to showcase the success of your activities and highlight the potential returns from using community funds to develop your specific region.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ongoing contributions!

7 Likes
7

Great great great! An interesting midlayer for better governance across regional DAOs, guaranteeing a more unified approach that can lead to better efficiency through communication overtime.

A positive initiative for sure.

7 Likes
8

I’m genuinely thrilled to support this proposal. This initiative represents a pivotal step towards truly decentralized governance, empowering each region with equal representation and direct, transparent funding. Collaborating with our amazing Regional Orgs—Celo EU, Celo Africa, CeLatam, Celo Colombia, Celo Mexico, Celo Philippines, and Koh Celo—has been an inspiring journey. Together, we’re building a framework that balances global synergy with local autonomy, ensuring that every voice is heard and every community thrives.

Being part of coordinating this proposal has reinforced my belief in the power of collective effort and thoughtful governance. I’m excited to see how this Regional Council will enhance our ecosystem, fostering innovation, collaboration and financial inclusion across all regions.

Let’s go!! :yellow_heart::raised_hands:t4:

5 Likes
9

Regional DAOs have been integral to Celo’s grassroots and local growth. The new structure looks to be promising. I fully support this proposal.

8 Likes
10

Each region has its own trends, narratives, and needs. Celo’s strength will lie in its ability to adapt globally while resonating locally, while increasing KPIs and accountability. Having clear regional council objectives helps address:

  • What is this region’s specific contribution to Celo’s mission?
  • What metrics can demonstrate real impact in this region?
  • How does this region engage with end-users, builders, or enterprises in culturally relevant ways?

As the leader of @CeloMexico and a member of the Regional Council, I fully support this initiative. The structured, cross-regional collaboration outlined in the proposal reflects Celo’s commitment to decentralized governance. The alignment with Governance 2.0 and the transition into the L2 framework is particularly exciting.

This proposal ensures every region can act locally while contributing globally, with clear goals, transparent metrics, and culturally relevant engagement. It’s an important step in solidifying Celo’s ecosystem as both inclusive and impactful.

Looking forward to continuing this journey together and building something transformative. :green_heart:

4 Likes
11

Context:

For the past few months, I’ve been working with CeloPG to rescope the Regional Hub Program to align with the CEL2 roadmap and tighter scope. After being unable to fit Celo EU’s increased budget within the proposed ~$350K Regional Program, Joan decided to move forward with a separate CeloEU funding as they cannot wait anymore. One of the pivotal disagreements was that their proposal was not up to par, experienced a drastic budget increase for H1, and provided no clear ROI to justify budget and scope increase. After consulting with CeloPG, we decided to pause work on the Regional Hub Program to reassess our approach in light of this unexpected development.

Less than 24 hours later, Joan’s proposal was submitted. Given its level of detail, it’s clear this was in development for some time. However, this was not communicated during our prior discussions. Transparency would have been helpful and expected. Additionally, I noticed that the video assets I produced were used without prior permission to promote this initiative. While I encourage leveraging resources, proper communication and consent would have been more respectful. These countless conduct breaches make me doubt Joan’s character’s authenticity.

TLDR Revised 6-Months Proposal: For context, our revised proposal included a lean approach including:

  • 350K cUSD—$158.5K less than Celo EU-led proposal
  • Ambassador Program
  • Neutral Foundation backed board for oversight
  • Exlusion of OPs & Management Fees
  • Reliance on leads to guide the council
  • A 3-step milestone-based distribution

The overall increase for Regional DAOs within the Celo EU proposal without sufficient justification or detailed oversight raises concerns about efficiency and accountability. The current proposal should not be approved due to this being net negative for Celo on the following three fronts:

1. Budget Growth (2024 vs. 2025): The current expansion would introduce a ~40% budget increase compared to H1-2024 when removing outliers. This is increase is hard to justify in a transitional phase.
2. Lack of Clarity: 5 of the 7 handbooks and 8 of the 11 budgets are missing. Without this clarity, we cannot justify a higher budget. This gives me the feeling that this move was rushed and makes me doubt the intentions.
3. Council Oversight: A council approving its own funding and spending creates space for budget inflation, corruption and an echo chamber. As an example, removing CeloPG as an oversight increased the budget by +40%. I can imagine a neutral oversight board consisting of Foundation members is a fair compromise.
4. Bundled Proposals: This approach avoids community evaluation of individual merits and allows overfunded or low-ROI initiatives to slip through. Pairing this with a council that approves its funding is a recipe for disaster.

Looking Forward:
I remain committed to supporting the evolution of the Regional Hub Program even though I believe the Regional leads should carry this initiative. However, the current proposal is incomplete, and the lack of independent oversight raises concerns about increased funding during a transitional period. From my perspective, this bundled approach allows Celo EU to pass an overfunded and low-ROI initiative in disguise of collaboration. Due to the reasons above, I don’t believe this proposal will lead to a net positive for Celo’s long-term goals and will only contribute to an echo chamber of low ROI initiatives.

6 Likes
12

Having led CeloEU in 2023 and worked with half a dozen regional DAOs, I know the value of these local hubs. However, there has and will always be an ongoing conversation about their ROI - which is healty.

In 2024, through CeloPG, we aimed to increase Regional DAO effectiveness and better articulate their impact by A: including progress reports into the Regional DAO model, B: Setting periodic budgets, and C: integrating them into multiple events and programs.

This draft lacks clarity and fails to mention how these initiatives will drive meaningful developments for the Celo ecosystem. It feels out of touch considering the stage of the Celo ecosystem.

Suggestion on how to progress with Regional DAOs
Regional DAOs have value; however, due to their diversity, they should be reviewed based on their merit. As such, I suggest each region submit a detailed Season 0 plan, including past contributions, upcoming initiatives, and a clear budget/timeline, to Celo Governance.

To streamline the process and allow for better comparison, I suggest creating a submission deadline and pre-determined Vote Stage—such as a Draft S0 proposal by Friday, February 7th, and Voting to start by February 14th.

The approved regional DAOs should then form a Regional DAO council to enhance inter coordination and integration with other Celo Foundation and Celo Ecosystem Programs.

3 Likes
13

hey @NikoG and @LuukDAO

Thank you so much for your feedback. I’m genuinely pleased to finally have this discussion in a public forum, as it’s an opportunity to address important matters constructively.

As I’ve shared with you during the past season, we may need to agree to disagree on certain points, especially as we move forward with a parallel proposal.

To address your comment, I’ve broken my response into two parts: Celo EU and the Celo Regional Council.

Celo EU

Over the past three seasons, Celo EU has operated more like a private entity than a community-driven initiative. This structure has limited opportunities for new contributors and players to join the team. Additionally, a significant portion of pre-approved budgets was allocated to specific teams, which, in my view, constrained broader ecosystem engagement.

From the start, I’ve been clear that my intention is to open up Celo EU to real contributors who align with the vision of building a strong, blockchain-driven community in Europe.

The first step of this vision has already been achieved, even before the proposal’s implementation. We now have a high-quality team of contributors, including individuals from both within and outside the ecosystem. This team is positioned to deliver significantly more value than in previous seasons. We also aim to establish a more open governance framework, reducing reliance on a closed group of decision-makers and promoting broader participation.

Regarding the budgets, Celo EU intends to operate with the same level of funding disbursed by the community during the past season. However, a significant portion of the funds needs to be allocated during the first six months of 2025 to establish a foundational framework. This ensures efficient use of the annual budget upfront, rather than later in the year. This framework will help minimize operational costs while creating more business opportunities. These plans are detailed in the Celo EU handbook, which includes DAO structure ideas adapted to business needs. Transparency and accountability remain key priorities for our team.

Over the past two months, five different budgets and drafts were prepared for Celo EU, all of which were shared with you both since early December. I’ve actively reached out to discuss potential alternatives, but these efforts have often been met with delays and limited engagement.

Planning effectively has also been challenging due to inconsistent information and unclear intentions, which have created obstacles for the ecosystem as a whole. Community-driven initiatives require transparency, collaboration, and a long-term vision, which remain core to Celo EU’s approach.

Celo Regional Council

For additional context, as you know, I’ve been providing feedback on the Regional DAO analysis and your ideas for creating a centralizing entity to oversee the Regional DAOs. I’ve raised concerns about operational costs that I believe are unnecessary, as well as the centralized nature of the proposed approach.

I’ve previously shared that your approach felt less community-driven and more aligned with a centralized structure under the Celo Public Goods umbrella. This conflicts with the decentralization we are striving for. To address this, we’ve introduced templates and accountability measures to promote transparency and full accountability across all Regional DAOs.

You mentioned concerns about missing proposals, handbooks, and budgets, and you are correct that some of these are still in progress. However, we are actively supporting Regional DAOs in preparing these materials, and completing them will be a mandatory requirement before any funds are disbursed. This progress has been achieved through direct engagement with the Regional DAOs, ensuring their needs and plans for the next six months are fully understood. This creates a bottom-up approach, as opposed to the top-down model you’ve proposed.

It’s important to emphasize that this proposal is transitional in nature. Its goal is to maintain the momentum created by the Regional DAOs, align with new governance frameworks, and ensure collaboration with key stakeholders.

Budget Analysis: 2024 vs. 2025

The claim that the 2025 budget introduces a ~40% increase compared to H1-2024 does not align with the actual data. A more detailed and accurate analysis is provided below:

  1. Adjusting the 2024 Budget for Fair Comparison:
  • Some Regional DAOs in 2024 operated for less than six months and therefore received partial-year funding. To accurately compare the budgets, we adjusted these partial budgets to reflect a full year by doubling the amounts for these DAOs.
  • After this adjustment, the total budget for 2024 increases from $762,300 (original data) to $897,150. This adjustment ensures a fair and accurate comparison between 2024 and 2025.
  1. 2025 Budget (H1 + H2):
  • The proposed budget for H1 2025 is $491,000. Assuming an equal allocation for H2 2025, the total estimated budget for the full year is $982,000.
  1. Difference and Percentage Change:
  • The difference between the adjusted 2024 budget ($897,150) and the estimated 2025 budget ($982,000) is $84,850.
  • This represents a 9.46% increase, far from the ~40% increase that has been claimed.

Closing Remarks

For some, politics is about holding power. For others, including myself and the Celo EU team (and probably other regional DAOs), politics is a means to enable us to build and deliver value for the ecosystem.

While Celo EU may have coordinated this parallel proposal, it has been embraced by all Regional DAOs because it guarantees their autonomy and eliminates reliance on bottlenecks or centralized decision-making.

The best evidence of this collaborative effort is that a Regional Council has already been constituted and collectively voted to move forward with this proposal. Let’s honor the collective will and continue working together toward our shared vision.

5 Likes
14

Hi Niko,

First of all, thank you for sharing your perspective. I understand how important it is to ensure everyone’s concerns are acknowledged, especially when the goal is a decentralized solution that benefits the entire community. I’d like to clarify a few points from my vantage as someone who’s new to the Regional DAOs ecosystem yet actively helping coordinate this proposal with all participating DAOs:

  1. Not Led by Celo EU Alone
    This proposal is not driven by a single group or region. It has been formed collectively by multiple Regional Orgs—Celo EU, Celo Africa, CeLatam, Celo Colombia, Celo Mexico, Celo Philippines, and Koh Celo—who felt misrepresented or constrained by existing frameworks. The driving vision is to make governance more inclusive and distributed, rather than relying on a small circle of decision-makers.

  2. A Transparent, Decentralized Council
    The proposal suggests a Regional Council composed of representatives from each DAO, rather than centralizing oversight in one body or region. This Council is designed to handle funding decisions, share best practices, and coordinate across multiple regions in a clear, on-chain manner. In my view, distributing authority among the very communities who do the work is more equitable than limiting it to a few individuals in one place.

  3. No Single “Bundled” Approach
    We understand the concern about “bundled proposals.” However, from what I’ve seen, the current structure allows each DAO to submit its own detailed handbook, budgets, and transparency measures. Their collective alignment under one transitional proposal is intended to reflect a broad community consensus, rather than forcing a single solution from the top down. This is quite different from smaller teams bundling multiple programs behind closed doors.

  4. Comparison With CPG’s Proposal
    You mentioned a neutral oversight board or the involvement of a foundation-backed entity. From our discussions, many community members felt that having an external group controlling budgets created confusion or bottlenecks. The new model shifts that power to the actual Regional Orgs themselves, which aligns better with the principle of decentralization. It’s not about removing oversight entirely; it’s about distributing that oversight among the very regions impacted by these decisions.

  5. Ambassador Program & Milestones
    This proposal does include an ambassador program—led by the Regional DAOs as a path to onboarding new communities. The idea is to ensure accountability and clarity from the ground up, rather than top-down. Because this is a six-month transitional proposal, the approach to tranches and milestone payouts may differ from a longer-term arrangement; however, we remain open to refining the distribution of funds if that serves the community better.

  6. Encouraging direct engagement with each DAO
    If there are concerns about ROI, deliverables, or specific budgets, I encourage you (and anyone curious) to review each DAO’s work, either through their handbook (when uploaded in the next days) or by connecting directly with them. One of the main objectives here is to reduce silos and build cross-regional transparency, so discovering those details firsthand might address doubts about echo chambers or inflation.

  7. A Call for Constructive Dialogue
    I genuinely respect the passion behind your comments and would love to see that energy transform into constructive engagement with all Regional DAOs involved. If there’s a worry about incomplete information, let’s collaborate to fill those gaps rather than dismissing an initiative that many people across the ecosystem (including foundation members and community supporters) have worked hard to shape.

I appreciate you voicing these concerns. Decentralization is, by nature, a difficult balance of autonomy and coordination. My hope is that we can continue discussing improvements or clarifications openly—focused on facts, proposed mechanisms, and the collective vision we all share for Celo’s future. If you have specific questions or suggestions, please don’t hesitate to bring them forward so we can refine the proposal further in the spirit of true community-led governance.

Thank you again for your feedback, and I look forward to our ongoing dialogue.

6 Likes
15

Hi Luuk,

Thank you for sharing your perspective. I completely agree that conversations around ROI for local hubs are not only valid but also beneficial—it’s how we evolve and ensure accountability. Let me clarify a few points based on your concerns and suggestions:

  1. Existing Regional DAOs, Not New Entities
    The DAOs in this proposal aren’t being created from scratch; they’ve already been recognized and, in many cases, approved under previous frameworks. This proposal is about shifting to a new governance structure that emphasizes shared decision-making and regional autonomy, rather than “resetting” any DAO that’s already contributing to the ecosystem.

  2. Collaborative Effort & Council Formation
    A Regional Council has already been constituted, with each DAO voting to move forward. This collective decision underscores the collaborative nature of the proposal—“Globally connected, locally empowered,” with distributed governance and equal representation. Instead of managing everything in silos or under one small group, the Council stands as a unifying but decentralized body that can integrate seamlessly with Celo Foundation and other ecosystem programs.

  3. Purpose & Clarity
    While we may not have spelled out every single local initiative in the draft, each DAO maintains its own handbook detailing ongoing projects, milestones, and community impact. This proposal sets a governance framework for those projects—a crucial piece many have felt was missing. It’s also an evolution of the accountability measures introduced in 2024 (progress reports, alignment with events, etc.), taking them a step further by ensuring that decisions and resources flow directly through the regions themselves.

  4. Season 0 Approach vs. Current Model
    We appreciate your suggestion for a “Season 0” plan. However, these DAOs already have a track record and are aligned with Celo’s broader goals, so rather than restarting everything, our approach is to build on the existing momentum. Each DAO has budget timelines and past deliverables; the Council framework is designed to unify these under one transparent process while maintaining local ownership.

  5. Driving Meaningful Developments
    We believe the best evidence of meaningful development is the local initiatives that each DAO is already implementing—ranging from education, stablecoin adoption, regional partnerships, and more. By having DAOs govern themselves collectively, we ensure that innovation is bottom-up and reflective of real, local needs. That’s ultimately how meaningful impact occurs.

  6. Honor the Collective Will
    Finally, it’s worth noting that this proposal is the result of communal dialogue. The DAOs themselves voted and agreed on this structure. It’s intended as a more equitable way to distribute governance and resources than a top-down or one-size-fits-all approach. If anything, we see this as honoring the will of those who have been consistently hands-on in their communities, rather than imposing yet another external process.

I appreciate the healthy debate around how best to support regional hubs. Let’s keep building on the synergy, refining structures where needed, and reinforcing a genuinely decentralized future for Celo—one that values both local autonomy and unified coordination.

4 Likes
16

Thanks for explaining your point of view. However, your comments don’t change my opinion that each region should submit its own detailed Season 0 plan to be evaluated independently on its merit. Looking forward to see other stakeholders input!

4 Likes
17

GM @Joan_DeRB and Team

Thanks for posting this proposal, we wholeheartedly :yellow_heart: support this proposal! It presents a remarkable opportunity to align regional organizations effectively, fostering collaboration and innovation. By creating a cohesive framework, we can significantly reduce bottlenecks that often hinder progress and efficiency. :chart_with_upwards_trend:

This initiative not only streamlines processes but also enhances accountability, ensuring that all stakeholders are engaged and responsible for their roles. When organizations work together towards a common goal, we can leverage our collective strengths and resources, ultimately driving positive change in our communities. :busts_in_silhouette:

Moreover, this alignment allows us to share best practices, learn from one another, and adapt to the ever-evolving challenges we face. It’s essential that we remain proactive and responsive :handshake:, and this proposal sets the stage for a more integrated approach to our regional objectives.

10 Likes
18

Hi Joan & Team

We support this proposal to have a regional DAO council that works across the next 6 months to design the framework for Regional DAOs and shape the new governance process. We think that this idea has strong merit. It allows closer collaboration, sharing of ideas, best practices and uniting the Celo ecosystem through cultural artefacts such as joint governance calls. It also brings more voices to the governance conversation and allows for more ideas to shape the community.

The idea to have DAO proposals evaluated on their own merit makes sense and allows the entire ecosystem to have an input towards how the regional DAOs contribute to growth. It also allows the DAOs to be independently accountable to the ecosystem and for the ecosystem to support the best ideas. The regional DAO council as it stands encourages each member to defend their proposal independently. Therefore this idea is aligned with the current thinking among the member DAOs.

While the council in its present form can propose various ideals and policies to be taken up by members, it has no enforcement capability. As it stands constituted, the DAO council has the opportunity to also include independent and uninterested parties to the council to form an oversight committee, an example could be volunteers from the Celo Foundation, other fund recipients or contributors to the OP governance process - this oversight committee can be valuable in ensuring that DAOs in the council are efficient, effective and transparent. It will also limit the risk of having an echo chamber and opens up the proceedings of the council to the broader community.

In conclusion, we think that there is strong merit in allowing this proposal to move forward and open up the opportunity across the next 6 months to design and evolve a new governance framework for Regional DAOS while including some of the best ideas from the past experience in the CPG model.

9 Likes
19

Thanks for the proposal. I’m going to ignore all the politics for now and focus on the content. One note on that though - it’s a good thing we’re having decision making in public, this is what blockchain was meant to be.

Personally, I’m not a huge fan of local DAOs. I mentioned this in my delegate thread and that I would generally be leaning negative on structures and proposals related to DAOs. I understand names are just a name, but thinking everything is a DAO rather than simply a project or work stream drives me crazy. Why can’t there just be a single coordination group that disburses funds to individuals, companies, self-coordinated group, committees, or whomever submits a really good proposal for something they are building or delivering? Locality in a connected world would/could be irrelevant. Good project ideas stand on their own. That said, I did speak to a few of you in Bangkok about this and got some valid push back that regionally there are different sets of challenges for different global groups that need to be coordinated on the ground. Plus I know not everything fits into a perfect “do stuff - deliver thing” box, especially in outreach and marketing, which is why they are so hard to quantify ahead of time.

So I’m not strictly anti-regional DAO, just anti-complexity.

Having DAOs, sub-DAOs, sub-sub-DAOs all with their own resources, managers and staff, content, processes, and administrative workload, adds a lot of duplication, churn, and ultimately - waste. I note some of the plans in the proposal to streamline standards so this is a step in the right direction.

It’s also great to see comments in the proposal about improving transparency but still most of the content and text in this proposal is about administrative processes; reporting lines, management structure, bylaws, timelines, budgets, and so on. That’s all important, but most important to me is what will be actually be delivered by the regional DAOs themselves. This is the detail that is really missing for me. If the regional DAOs don’t know yet, but just want to reserve their allocation up-front now, then they shouldn’t be asking for any money yet. 80% of the proposal text should be on what work is planned from each of the DAOs pulling from the funds, and 20% housekeeping at the end on policies and procedures - not the other way around. I know it’s been the trend in governance here to date to be really precise with operational detail but we’re all going into new territory with the L2 / Optimism and perhaps stronger guidance from the Foundation with Seasons, so could be a good time to shake it up a little.

My preference would be that budgets are activity based, not just a standing pool of funds to be utilized. Honestly, reading between the lines, I think that’s what Seasons is more going to be about: a focused 6-month sprint to get to a themed goal for the period. So what I would like to see is a little more innovation in the design of the Celo Regional Council - perhaps aligning more with how a Season-al future might look. A “L2 migration” focus would be an excellent starting theme (for example). Simplicity will really create the gains in transparency and delivery that everyone wants.

Being embedded in CeloPG to date I had many of the same concerns there as I’m sharing here. What started as an attempt to simplify governance for small and medium sized proposals was somewhat thwarted by technical issues (with Snapshot) with the intent to create an agile public voting mechanism for “not large enough for direct governance” style proposals. Ultimately it merged into an overlay coordination system managing budgeting and governance timing and structure, which absolutely had it’s benefits over direct governance for most of the grantees (Prezenti definitely took advantage of all the behind the scenes work @LuukDAO performed here). I see a somewhat similar approach here with bundled grantees under a larger coordinating entity and while there are standardization and operational benefits I’m also wary of the drawbacks.

I know it’s a little bit of chicken and egg problem - DAOs can’t realistically plan out their activities without having a stable budget allocation - and I don’t believe that anyone should be working for free either. For example, you can’t tell us yet what the KPIs will be yet because they aren’t planned to be gathered until 4 months into the timeline. In a perfect world these would come before the spend request. The reports from the DAOs are great guide for what might be coming though, and I encourage everyone to have a read through, there’s more there than I often give credit for. But I would like to see a little more clarity / forward-looking information of what they each have planned for (effectively now) the next 5 months.

I do understand the transition point we’re in, and that everything going to governance over the next few weeks may be kind of a bridging round (Season 0?) that makes it awkward to communicate a lot of specificity if everything might be upturned or refocused in H2. Prezenti has a similar challenge of finding a sweet spot in a H1 bridging proposal, so I am aware that not everything can be perfect right now.

High level I’m supportive of the concept to keep strong performing DAOs operational, but would love more detail on expected outcomes.

When is this planned to go to vote?

11 Likes
20

Hey @Thylacine

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback. We truly appreciate the time and effort you put into this, and your insights are incredibly valuable.

Regarding the “DAOs” terminology, you’re absolutely right—it can be misleading, and the term doesn’t necessarily reflect what these groups actually do. However, for the sake of simplicity and consistency, we decided to stick with the name instead of introducing new terms like “hubs” or “organizations.” Our focus has been on streamlining governance rather than complicating it with additional terminology.

This proposal aims to address two key areas:

1. Budget Allocation for Regional DAOs

We understand that transparency and accountability are critical. That’s why before any final disbursement, each Regional DAO must provide a clear scope, including project details, allocations, and deliverables. Some DAOs—like Europe, Mexico, and Colombia—are already prepared, while others are finalizing their documentation.

This structured approach is actually anti-complexity—we’ve provided standardized templates for all DAOs to follow, ensuring a common framework that enhances transparency and speeds up the process without unnecessary bureaucracy.

2.Streamlining Governance & Representation

One of the biggest challenges we identified was the bottleneck created by CPG, which often left Regional DAOs with little representation and a “take it or leave it” approach. That’s not inclusive governance. The Regional Council is designed to fix this by decentralizing decision-making while keeping it accountable.

We recognize the ongoing governance transition with the L2 migration, and that’s precisely why we are iterating on the Council’s structure—ensuring that it remains open and includes representatives from CPG, the Celo Foundation, and other key stakeholders who want to be actively involved in shaping the ecosystem’s future.

This is not about centralizing power but about creating a space for those with high-context knowledge to collaborate.

Next Steps

We will be presenting this proposal tomorrow afternoon at the Governance Call, and we expect to start the voting process between Friday and Monday.

Again, we really appreciate your insights. If you have further feedback or suggestions, let’s discuss them before the call!

9 Likes