My goal here is to set out what I see as the current state of proposals regarding the Guild.
1. Both parties agree that the Guild as it now exists (an artisan's collective) doesn't work particularly well and ought to be significantly altered or replaced so as to create a de jure executive branch.
2. I believe the CSDF is proposing an executive like unto that found in Parliamentary democracies, where the executive (the CSDF calls it a cabinet) is appointed and may be a subset of the majority faction in the RA. I'm not clear as to whether or not this appointed cabinet would serve at the pleasure of the RA and could be sacked via a no-confidence motion.
This raises a question in my mind as to checks and balances. In our current system the GM has an (overrideable) veto over financial legislation and budget. The RA currently drafts the city budget. In discussions and debates, the CSDF has suggested that the Cabinet would draft a budget and submit it to the RA for approval. This combined with the possibility of the no confidence motion seems to check the cabinet meaningfully.
On the other hand, if the cabinet serves at the pleasure of the RA, there seems to be less of a check on legislative overreaching by the latter. Who limits the RA under this Cabinet proposal?
Also there is the matter of size and constitution of the cabinet. I see three possibilities:
1) The constitution dictates the size of the cabinet and its portfolios
2) The RA designs the cabinet via legislation
3) Each time a head of the cabinet (the CSDF uses Chancellor) is appointed, he or she determines what other cabinet members there are.
Options 2 or 3 create the possibility of executive power being concentrated in a single person if a one person cabinet is chosen.
I believe the following:
1 In no case should the central executive or unelected civil servants subject to it make decisions about zoning, covenants, street and road placement and the like in each sim.
2. The executive should serve as a meaningful check on the power of other branches. In order to do so, it must be in some way directly accountable to the people.