It is shared decision-making. We don't see any rationale given as to why the request was made to stay there. There may have been reasons provided verbally, but I guess it comes back to the issue that if there were valid reasons to stay there, then the government shouldn't have started a bidding process and then been committed to renting space, because they ended up having to obviously rent the space of the person who won the bid.
On May 18th, 2006. See this statement in context.