Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
judicial or quasi-judicial function, as was the case in Lyons. Rather, Showers alleges that Musson negligently performed its excavation, construction, and drainage responsibilities under the contract. Specifically, Showers' complaint alleges that Musson is liable for "improper drainage, . . . maintenance, excavation, construction procedures, and failure to take corrective measures." ¶ 53. These assertions are fundamentally different from the assertion that a governmental entity negligently selected a design that a contractor imple mented for a government project. Design selection is a type of governmental entity decision that we have determined is within the legislative or quasi-legislative function immunized under Wis. Stat. § 893.80(4). See, e.g., Chart, 57 Wis. 2d at 100-01 ; Lange v. Town of Norway, 77 Wis. 2d 313,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that the existence of a copy of a decision in a bill file along with numerous references to a decision of the court of appeals in the legislative history indicated that an amendment was made in response to that decision
B. recognizing that the decision to undertake a project or how to design the project may be immunized as the exercise of a legislative or quasilegislative function
C. holding that legislative consent to suit must be by clear and unambiguous language in either a statute or by other express legislative permission
D. holding that a zoning decision pertaining to a specific property is not a legislative act but is rather quasijudicial in nature
E. recognizing legislative or quasilegislative nature of design decision
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.