we are asking you to approve gives support staff a lot of leeway in how to allocate the funding weatherbytween staff or consultant. >> okay, i guess my question is - >> this appropriation would be allocated to the contract already approved. what we had planned was a bond sale with the engineering contract and staff work that you already approved. this is just a change in funding source. >> thank you. i just want to ask a question on the process here, because we don't have any proceeds at the bottom as we had planned and this is an appropriation or use of fund balance, what is the reason we go to the board of supervisors? >> katie can answer this question. [laughter] >> we need appropriation authority. this 11,500,000 dollars has never been appropriated, we cannot spend money without getting approval from the board of supervisors. >> i got it now. any other questions or comments? >> "all lives matter" one favor. >> resolution approved. >> mrs. meriwether and her firm have been instrumental in maximizing small business participation. she will be speaking during the outreach portion of my pr

weatherby in two years or four years. that it not be way down by 3032. thank you. >> any other public comment regarding this item? public comment is closed. commissioner woo ho? >> thank you. very timely to have this presentation. i think something you had followed up, i just wanted to say that the time schedule, i think is a very good one to have in the middle, obviously by the end of this year and follow through with our commitment to the community that we would be addressing seawall lot 332 and 330. i think we are open to not necessarily having these tied together. my only question really, since we want to see what happened in the rfp process is it occurs to me, and it was mentioned in the staff reports, it was seemed not to go into detail, given the cost of retrofit, including the sea level rise, seismic upgrade and everything else, it's obviously high number. the demolition cost. what if we did consider, and allow that in the rfp to actually demolish the pier and replace them and maybe not with the same square footage. maybe we can be open to see wh

weatherby on or off site. therefore, what you are considering today is a two variant plan which gives the vendors the power to decide without influence for kilroy or the city, which is best for them if the vendors elect to stay, we'll go forward with our original plan and build a new flower market as part of the project. it will be codified in the d.a. if the vendors elect to move to an off-site mac location permanently, kilroy has agreed to provide 100% of the equity to develop that site. the ground-floor experience has been thoughtfully reimagined and includes childcare, increased open space, smaller truck space and community facilities. as a reminder, timing is key. it is a port into approve all of the vendors this year. both of their eos require the vendors to be relocated temporarily despite which is available now. to be clear, the move will not affect our plan to break ground next year. while the city is reviewing our permits for the flower mart park -- project, willie permitting and building out the sit