I've read the proposal a couple of times, and I don't see where it is describing a process to recommend folks to Randy; it appears to be written as a process by which "Ambassadors" are invested with their titles by the sole authority of the TalkBoard. (It says that they become "Ambassadors" upon 2/3 vote; it doesn't say they are recommended to Randy upon 2/3 vote. So which is it?)
As cholula says, everything we do gets run by Randy.
The TB has absolutely zero administrative power on FT. Not a single edit or admin feature/function. All we can ever do is suggest things to Randy and the HoM which is either accepted or rejected and implemented or not. Granted, Randy has rarely pulled out his veto pen and typically administratively enacts TB recommendations, but I think that says more about the difficulty in achieving the level of consensus required to pass a TB motion than anything else. @:-)
As I said early on, I realize there is a natural inclination to compare Ambassadors to Moderators. But really, that is like comparing a cruise director to a cop. An ambassador's entire job description is to be a smiling face and offer assistance. A moderator's job description may include being a smiling face and offering assistance, but their overall job AND authority is infinitely broader. One can compare a cruise director to a cop, but ultimately I just don't see that being a productive exercise in terms of creating the program...totally different jobs, totally different focuses, totally different skill set, etc, etc, etc.