I checked with @cburniske and he shares the views below 
It seems the process of forming the Foundation is already underway, while the MGRC as a unified body does not yet exist. I don’t think “weighing in on the formation of the Rust Foundation” should be prioritized in the early days of the MGRC (perhaps ECC and/or ZF are currently better positioned to do that), but in the future, I think the MGRC could definitely collaborate with or support the Rust Foundation, especially if there are concrete Rust-related pain points for Zcash developers. MGRC can collaborate with ECC and ZF (via their representatives in the MGRC, assuming they get elected) to establish whether such pain points exist and how to best address them.
I’m personally supportive of 1-year terms for the first cycle with the option to run for re-election. Moving forward, I think the term length should be longer: 2-3 years, depending on how the MGRC is structured in terms of compensation and the division of labor. A single individual should be allowed to serve maximum two terms in a row (although I’m open to hearing arguments why that’s not a good rule to have). I also think it’s not wise to replace all members at once, which could cause too big of a disruption. Either the lead coordinators serve an extra year, gradually handing the role over to incoming members, or the MGRC hires a full-time administrator (as suggested here by @alchemydc), a position that can be filled on a slightly different schedule than the MGRC to smooth operations during membership change.