Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
reference to the content of the regulated speech,” Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781, 790, 109 S.Ct. 2746, 2753, 105 L.Ed.2d 661 (1989) (citations omitted), or serves purposes unrelated to the content of expression, it is deemed neutral, Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288, 295, 104 S.Ct. 3065, 3070, 82 L.Ed.2d 221 (1984), even if it has an incidental effect on a particular category of speech. City of Renton v. Playtime Theatres, 475 U.S. at 48, 106 S.Ct. at 929. The content-neutrality requirement can be met if the challenged ordinance seeks to control secondary effects related to protected expression. This conclusion emanates from the controlling holding of Barnes v. Glen Theatre, 501 U.S. at 584, 111 S.Ct. at 2469 (Souter, J. concurring in judgement) . See Triplett Grille, Inc. v. City of Akron,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing secondary effects as sufficient basis for governmental regulation of sexually oriented businesses
B. recognizing utswmc as a governmental unit under the act
C. holding section 1010215 does not waive governmental immunity merely because a governmental action falls within the listed governmental functions thus further inquiry under the act is necessary
D. recognizing governmental interest in rehabilitation
E. recognizing the protection of preliminary governmental materials
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.