To my knowledge, the operating costs are in neither set, or if they are they are assumed to be the same. So in some sense, unless you're positive that the operating cost would change depending on who owns it, then there is no change there. They specify what they expect the capital costs to be. They are only going after the major ones. Then Larco is saying these are the ones we will take responsibility for.
In the case of the Hays Building, the $21.7 million identified on the capital cost side, they say they will take responsibility for $16.1 million. So 74% of the capital costs that have been identified will be assumed by Larco. But any unidentified capital costs that do come up will be paid by the lessee, by the government. That's where the unknown is, if you will, or where the risk is. If they choose to operate the building in a way that yields higher operating costs, then the government will be liable for that too.
They have two incentives to do that. One is that their management fee is tied to the operating cost, and secondly, anything that improves the long-term value of this building will be to their account, to their benefit.