deputy city attorney cheryl atoms? -- adams? the question is the amendment i offered here, how that differs from the amendments that were adopted this morning in committee. those amendments adopted this morning did not have a mutual agreement from the different parties that were involved in the agreement. >> i will ask charles sullivan to address that. >> the amendments were actually discussed and agreed upon by the developers. the point of what sherrill said earlier -- cheryl said earlier is that this was a contract. the board can condition approval of that contract. they cannot force the developer to address those -- to accept the changes. it would require that the developer consent to change the contract, ultimately. the question is are the changes being proposed something the developer would accept. if not, the board could pass a resolution approving an agreement that never enters into. supervisor avalos: since the developer has already accepted that agreement -- >> the developer discussed the changes introduced by president