No one would ever turn down an opportunity to work with them, at least if there's at least one major tenant. It becomes complex when you have 10 or 15 tenants in a building, but if you have a building.... There are many like this that have one major federal government tenant, have approached the landlord, have said that they'd like to find a way to collectively reduce energy, and have asked if the landlord is open to these kinds of investments.
The first thing is to do an energy audit and figure out where the opportunities are in any building, in any major building. There are 1,500 buildings in the BOMA BESt program. They all must have an energy audit; that's a requirement. That will always identify opportunities. Then it becomes a cost-benefit analysis. That's where the opportunity comes in: when you have a major tenant that's willing to be a participant in making those changes. Like I say, no major landlord would ever turn it down.
On the suggestion of getting tenants into some sort of competitive situation, I think profit sharing was more or less the recommendation made. I've also seen a lot of buildings that will do it on a contest basis and say “if we do this we will make a contribution to...”. That works too. That goes back to my original suggestion of tenant engagement, of having your tenants incented and motivated to want to be a part of the savings, as opposed to, “This is my workspace, and I don't pay for it, so I don't care.”