We have had a number of discussions about collaboration and the right mix of communities of interest and communities of place.
Here’s a real world example, the National Forest Advisory Board for the Black Hills National Forest. Here’s a link to their charter.
They incorporate many of the concepts we have discussed, including being advisory beyond planning. Here’s the mix:
OFFICERS AND MEMBERSHIP
a The membership of the Board shall consist of not more than 16 people, each of whom will represent a particular interest or point of view. The committee shall be representative of the Black Hills community interests and fairly balanced. Membership
shall be representative of the interests shown in the following three categories:
(1) Five persons who—
(a) Represent economic development;
(b) Represent developed outdoor recreation, off-highway vehicle users, or commercial recreation;
(c) Represent energy and mineral development;
(d) Represent the commercial timber industry; or
(e) Hold a Federal grazing permit or other land use permit within the area for which the committee is organized.
(2) Five persons representing—
(a) Nationally recognized environmental organizations;
(b) Regionally or locally recognized environmental organizations;
(c) Dispersed recreation;
(d) Archaeology and history; or
(e) Nationally or regionally recognized sportsmen’s groups, such as anglers or hunters.
(3) Six persons who hold—
(a) South Dakota state-elected office or elected-officer’s appointee;
(b) Wyoming state-elected office or elected officer’s appointee;
(c) South Dakota or Wyoming county- or local-elected office
(d) Tribal government-elected or -appointed office;
(e) A position as a South Dakota State natural resource agency official; and (f) A position as a Wyoming State natural resource agency Official.
What do y’all think of this mix?