Ethereum Name Service (ENS) co-founder Nick Johnson has voted against renewing the ENS DAO Security Council, causing a key governance proposal to fail just weeks before the body’s authority expires on July 24, 2026.
The council, a 4-of-8 multisignature group tasked with blocking potentially harmful governance actions, will not be renewed under the current proposal after it failed to secure enough support in the final on-chain vote, which closes on July 5 at 8:59 p.m. UTC.
Johnson, who controls about 3.26 million ENS tokens—roughly 80% of the votes cast—said his decision followed standard DAO procedures. The proposal had already passed an initial Snapshot vote, but fell short in the binding on-chain stage after he voted against it.
Concerns over governance concentration
The outcome has triggered debate within the ENS community about the concentration of voting power. Critics argue that the result highlights structural weaknesses in the DAO, where a single large stakeholder can effectively determine outcomes.
Johnson had abstained during the earlier voting phase, citing concerns with the proposed list of council members. When those concerns were not addressed, he moved to reject the renewal in the final vote.
The episode underscores how self-delegated holdings can shape governance decisions, particularly in systems where voter participation is relatively low.
Treasury control and valuation gap draw attention
The failed vote has also put a spotlight on ENS DAO’s treasury, which holds assets worth roughly $350 million, according to DeFiLlama data. That figure significantly exceeds the token’s market capitalization of about $168 million as of June 30.
This gap suggests that governance control over the DAO effectively carries influence over assets valued at more than double the circulating market value of ENS tokens, raising the stakes of voting outcomes.
New proposal aims to address issues
In response to the failed renewal, ENS Labs chief operating officer Katherine Wu has introduced a new proposal to form a revised eight-member Security Council with stricter requirements.
The plan would require approval from five out of eight members to overturn DAO decisions, raising the threshold from the previous four-of-eight structure. Johnson has expressed support for this updated framework, citing alignment with its revised mandate.
- Nominations for the new council remain open until July 3
- The proposal seeks to tighten oversight while addressing earlier concerns about structure and membership
Broader changes underway
The governance debate comes as ENS shifts its broader technical strategy. The project is moving away from its planned Namechain Layer 2 network and instead focusing on upgrading ENSv2 directly on Ethereum’s mainnet.
The upgrade is expected to introduce hierarchical registries and improve scalability while simplifying domain management.
ENS, launched in 2017, functions as a decentralized naming system on Ethereum, allowing users to replace complex wallet addresses with readable names such as “example.eth.” The platform plays a role similar to the traditional Domain Name System used on the internet.
Next steps for the DAO
Attention now turns to whether the new Security Council proposal can gain consensus among DAO participants. The outcome will serve as a test of ENS’s ability to adjust its governance structure following a contentious vote that exposed underlying power dynamics.
Curious how DAOs work in practice? Deepen your understanding of decentralized governance with our guide on what is DAO and how does it work.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
