Dear Pari, dear EURALO members,

Thank you for this consultation opportunity. Governance reform is important, and I welcome the open channel for community input. A few observations on the questions raised:

On board structure and representation: please kindly note that any expansion should be accompanied by clear criteria for geographic and stakeholder diversity, consistent with EURALO's mandate to represent European internet users broadly.

On term limits: the proposed framework is reasonable in principle, yet implementation should include transitional provisions to protect institutional memory during any reform period.

On amendment thresholds: raising the bar for constitutional change warrants careful consideration. A higher threshold protects stability but may also entrench governance arrangements that need updating. The community should consider which provisions, if any, warrant a higher threshold specifically.

On ALS representation, voting rights, and active participation: this is the most substantively significant question raised. Equal voting weight regardless of membership size raises genuine questions of democratic legitimacy. Any reform in this area should also address the question of active participation. Voting weight or representational standing might reasonably be conditioned on demonstrated engagement - such as participation in EURALO consultations, attendance at community calls, or timely reporting. An ALS that holds voting rights but does not actively participate weakens the legitimacy of outcomes just as much as unequal weighting does. EURALO may wish to consider whether its governance framework should include criteria for active status, with appropriate procedural safeguards for ALSes that face capacity constraints. This question deserves dedicated discussion rather than resolution through a general poll.

On dispute resolution: a clear internal process is overdue and would strengthen EURALO's institutional credibility.

Moreover, I would support a structured consultation process, though I would caution that a poll alone is insufficient for questions of this complexity. Any consultation should be designed to ensure that responses reflect active and informed participation, rather than simply aggregating formal membership.

Best regards,

Joanna Kulesza

---

Dear EURALO Board and EURALO Members,

As we review EURALO’s governance documents to ensure they reflect recent developments within the ICANN ecosystem and remain aligned with applicable law, this is an opportunity to consider whether aspects of our structure and processes should be updated. Community input on the following issues would be greatly appreciated:

1. Board Structure

The EURALO Articles of Association currently allow the Board to consist of as few as two members. Should a larger Board (e.g., 5–15 members) be considered to support broader representation and diversity of perspectives?

2. Terms and Leadership Rotation

The current framework does not clearly address term limits or consecutive terms. Should EURALO consider two-year terms with a maximum of three consecutive terms for Board members, officers, and ALAC representatives?

3. Constitutional Changes

Constitutional amendments currently require a two-thirds majority. Should EURALO consider a higher threshold (e.g., three-quarters) for fundamental governance changes?

4. ALS and Individual User Representation

Individual Users currently participate through the EURALO Individual Users’ Association, which holds a single vote similar to an ALS. Should voting weight reflect the number of participants represented, or should all ALSes and recognized structures continue to have equal voting rights?

5. Dispute Resolution

Should EURALO establish a clearer internal dispute resolution process before matters are escalated to the ICANN Ombudsman or other external mechanisms?

These governance choices will help shape EURALO's future. I would welcome your views and whether there is support for a broader consultation, such as a questionnaire or community poll.

Best regards,

Pari Esfandiari