Hello, and welcome to the Banc of California’s First Quarter Earnings Conference Call. All participants will be in listen-only mode. [Operator Instructions] After today’s presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. [Operator Instructions] Today’s call is being recorded, and a copy of the recording will be available later today on the company’s Investor Relations website. Today’s presentation will also include non-GAAP measures. The reconciliation for these and additional required information is available in the earnings press release. The reference presentation is available on the company’s Investor Relations website. Before we begin, we would like to direct everyone to the company’s Safe Harbor statement on forward-looking statements included in both the earnings release and the earnings presentation. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Jared Wolff, Banc of California’s President and Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead, sir.

Good morning, and welcome to Banc of California’s first quarter earnings call. Joining me on today’s call is Lynn Hopkins, our Chief Financial Officer, who will talk in more detail about our quarterly results. Q1 continued the progress we have made for several consecutive quarters on a core basis, in terms of growth of our – in earning assets, strong asset quality, improving our deposit mix, reducing our cost of deposits, increasing our fee income and maintaining disciplined expense control. All of the things that enhance franchise value and drive profitability. As we indicated on our last earnings call, we expected that our first quarter results would not be as strong as our fourth quarter for a variety of reasons. There’s quite a bit of noise in the results for each quarter that impact the net income comparison, which Lynn will discuss later in the call. But from the perspective of our core operating performance and our execution of the strategies designed to build long-term shareholder value, we had another strong quarter. Business development in terms of loan and deposit production was very good, which continues to support our balance sheet and earning assets. We continue to experience high levels of payoffs, however in certain legacy portfolios, which temper our overall growth. As the vaccine rollout continues and restrictions on business operations are gradually rolled back in our markets, we are beginning to see an increase in loan demand, albeit, below normalized levels. Nonetheless, our banking teams are doing an excellent job of developing and capitalizing on opportunities. We are seeing well-balanced production between C&I and commercial real estate loans and having particular success in areas where we have built expertise such as healthcare financing and specialty commercial real estate projects where we work with very experienced real estate entrepreneurs…

Thanks, Jared. First, as mentioned, please refer to our investor deck, which can be found on our Investor Relations website, as I review our first quarter performance. I will start by reviewing some of the highlights of our income statements, and then we’ll move to our balance sheet trends. Unless otherwise indicated, all prior period comparisons are with our fourth quarter of 2020. Net income available to common stockholders for the first quarter was $7.8 million, or $0.15 per diluted share. This compares to $17.7 million or $0.35 per diluted share for the fourth quarter. We had quite a few items that impacted the comparison of our net income between the first quarter of 2021 and the prior quarter. In the first quarter of 2021, net income available to common stockholders included $3.6 million in pre-tax losses on investments in alternative energy partnerships, $1.4 million of pre-tax merger-related costs and indemnified professional fees, net of recoveries, and $3.4 million in Series D preferred stock redemption expense. These items were offset in part by a lower effective tax rate resulting from $2.1 million in tax benefits on the exercise of all of our previously issued stock appreciation rights. In contrast, in the prior quarter, we had pre-tax gains on our investments in alternative energy partnerships of $673,000 and pre-tax net recoveries of indemnified legal expenses of $4.2 million. When backing out these items in each quarter, net of our normalized effective tax rate of 25% to get a better sense of our core operating performance. We had adjusted net income available to common stockholders of $12.9 million, or $0.25 per diluted share in the first quarter of 2021, compared to $13.9 million, or $0.28 per diluted share in the fourth quarter of 2020. Total revenue in the first quarter decreased $6.2…

Thank you, Lynn. We started off the year with another quarter of solid progress. As Lynn noted in our comments, while Q1 was noisy with the legacy HLBV expense, redemption of the preferred and one-time transaction expenses. On a normalized basis compared to Q4, it was a strong quarter with higher average loans and strong loan fundings and production, even if loan volumes ended the quarter down on a net basis. Since the announcement of our agreement with Pacific Mercantile, everything is preceded on schedule. We are making good progress on our integration planning and we continue to anticipate the deal closing during the third quarter. Both organizations have responded very positively to the transaction and are excited to begin working together and leveraging the collective strengths of the combined company. And once again, we look forward to welcoming the very talented colleagues at Pacific Mercantile, who will be joining our company. As we look ahead, we are increasingly confident about our expectation for a stronger second half of the year. We are seeing more commercial clients developing plans to capitalize on the strengthening economy and the anticipated impact of the stimulus package. This is a resulting in a growing pipeline of high-quality lending opportunities that should lead to well balanced loan production across all asset classes and industries. While the environment remains extremely competitive and refinancings will continue to drive run off in the legacy SFR portfolio. Given the state of our pipeline and the more optimistic tone we are hearing from our commercial clients, we are more confident than we were a few months ago that we will see a higher level of loan growth as we move through the year, assuming there are no setbacks to the economic recovery. Our success this quarter as in prior quarters, is a reflection of the tremendous talent we have assembled at Banc of California. We announced last week, another high-quality addition to our team. The addition of Alex Kweskin, as our EVP and Chief Human Resources Officer. Alex joins us from Union Bank, where he led HR for the last seven years for the $130 billion institution. We are thrilled to have Alex join our executive team, as we continue to hire talent that has been where we are headed. It can help us attract, retain and develop the best colleagues and build the most attractive culture for our employees and clients delivering for our shareholders and communities. Thank you for listening today. I hope that you and your families are safe and healthy. And I look forward to sharing more about Banc of California’s progress in the coming quarters. With that, operator, let’s go ahead now and open up the line for questions.

Thank you, sir. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Today’s first question comes from Timur Braziler with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning.

Good morning, Timur.

Maybe just starting on the loan growth, Jared, I hear your comments on increased customer conversation, and how that’s going to project accelerating growth for the remainder of the year. I’m guessing just what’s your assumption around warehouse production and looking at the legacy SFR portfolio, how much of a headwind does that going to be to future loan growth.

Thank you. So we added a new table to our presentation, which you may have seen. The table breaks out our production along with advances in fundings and then it shows net pay downs and payoffs. And so it’s easy to see that is strong as the third – the fourth quarter was. There was a heavy contribution from a warehouse. And in the first quarter, we had actually stronger as I mentioned in my comments, our loan production in terms of fundings was even stronger. And the negative impact was really from the net pay downs and warehouse. We think that will not be a headwind to achieving our goals for the year, obviously, assuming the economy, stays in the direction we all see it going. And in terms of SFR paydowns, we’ve been supplementing it with purchases, and so we netted the payoffs with purchases this quarter. So on a net basis, we were flat to a little bit up, and in SFR, so that’s not going to be a headwind.

Okay. And then maybe looking at the Pac Merc deal that’s going to close later in the year. Is there any balance sheet items that are going to be accelerated prior to deal closing. I’m just thinking in terms of like deploying liquidity may be in advance of the deal, or maybe accelerating some of the legacy SFR run downs to the extent that you can prior to that deal closing?

Lynn, do you want to take that first?

Sure. As of right now, Timur, I don’t think that we’ve identified anything there would be accelerated prior to the transaction. We’re working together and looking at it. But I think we like the asset classes and we’ll look at it closer to legal close.

Okay. And then the last question for me. Just looking at the credit profile in this quarter. Can you provide more color as to what drove some of those migrations at the classified? It seems like a lot of those loans are still paying. So I’m just wondering, what drove some of that credit migration. And then if you can provide the balance of the remaining legacy SFR portfolio as well?

Yes. Lynn, you want to look up the SFR portfolio. I think it’s – when you say the legacy, I mean we’ve consolidated into one portfolio, it’s the whole portfolio now, I think in the first quarter. Lynn, if I have it right, is $1.25 billion.

Yes. So – yes, let me, I forget to comment about that. To start with, we’ve supplemented the – obviously a lot of refinance activity last quarter and this quarter, and we’ve been able to participate through strategic loan purchases. And those have been about $250 million between the two quarters. So if we wanted to talk about the legacy portfolio, I think we would just exclude the purchases from the most recent two quarters. And I think when we refer to the legacy portfolio, these are the – this is a portfolio that was around in the pandemic, I mean at the onset of the pandemic. And we worked through the forbearance and deferment process and continue to do so. And then that’s just the subset there.

Yes. And so – and Timur, in terms of the migration of credit, I mean a big part of it was SFR, and it’s working with borrowers who were coming off of forbearance and maybe shifting on deferment, where things go to the back at the loan instead of they need to come up with some big payment and we still have the flexibility to migrate them. There are some borrowers who just, they’re well secured single-family residences where we’re not worried about the loss content, but there for whatever reason not communicating, or we just need to, and we’re working through a third-party servicer, as I’ve mentioned before. So it’s some of the nuances of having a single-family portfolio that’s legacy. But we – again, because of our – as we mentioned, as it relates to our reserve, we didn’t see a need to increase it by any means. We just don’t see as we go through all of these individual loans, we don’t see the loss content in any way requiring an increase in the reserve, and in many cases, you could argue that since our reserve went up on an ex-PPP basis quarter-over-quarter, you could argue that we maybe it’s on the full side right now. And we’ll just have to see how loan growth goes during the year and getting down to a more normalized kind of coverage ratio as the economy improves and things we have more visibility to what’s going on. We wanted to be appropriately conservative this quarter. We obviously have a model that we follow, but we thought that the small reserve release was appropriate.

Okay. Thank you very much.

No problem.

And our next question today comes from David Feaster with Raymond James. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning, everybody.

Good morning, David.

I just wanted to follow-up on the growth discussion. I guess maybe how my understanding that, maybe the warehouse is in as much of a headwind. I guess maybe could you just give us some of the strategy as to how you get to the mid to high single digit organic growth run rate just given the kind of the whole that we’re starting out in the first quarter. And just talk about how origination activity and then maybe where you’re seeing the strength and how much loan purchases might play into that guidance?

Well, loan purchases are primarily supplementing run-off, although, if we see attractive loans that makes sense, we’ll take advantage of it. I wouldn’t point out that average loans were up. So you can look at period end, but on an average basis earning assets were up in the quarter. And so I think that’s important to mention. Warehouse, I would say is, we guided it to a higher level for the year, so I think there is some – that’s some bulk that will come back and that can come on and we’re comfortable getting it up. But as I said we’re not going to build the bank around it, but I think there is some room to move in warehouse. And then just generally, I mean as you pointed out, we just see strong pipelines right now. I mean there just, there full. And the economy is definitely improving. We have people doing a great job bringing in loans across industries and assets. And we see – we’re optimistic about that right now. Actually our pricing for new production was up, which was also something we are pleased to see quarter-over-quarter. And if you look at our margin, if you look at our NIM, it was down, but if you compare it to – I think the first quarter, the fourth quarter was a little bit exceptional. If you look at our margins, which we have on Page 30 – 27 of the deck, it was kind of below three, then it got to 3.10% in the second quarter and the third quarter. So being at close to 3.20% in the first quarter, I realize it’s down from the fourth quarter, but there were some prepayments and other things in the fourth quarter that didn’t really show up in the first quarter. So we’re still expanding it. And while it’s hard to say that it’s going to keep expanding at the rate we did. We don’t see that being a headwind to because where you really growing with this – with the growth is, you’re talking about whereas our interest income and earnings going to come from. And so I think our margin is going to help there too.

Okay, that’s helpful color. You’re totally, right. We’re always heading next. I noticed that the rates were higher and that’s extremely encouraging. Could you just talk about how pricing is trending? And then maybe just on the margin, any detail around the PPP NII contribution in the quarter. How many net fees are remaining? And then just – it sounds like expecting some core NIM expansion, just given the improvement on both sides of the coin, I guess, but just any puts and takes on the margin as well?

Sure. I’ll let Lynn, collect the information on PPP. So I’ll go first. I want to be careful not to predict margin expansion because I think it went down more than I would have thought relative to the fourth quarter this quarter. But as Lynn and I look at it, I don’t see the room for it to go down as much. So I think it’s likely going to be flat or going up given where things are going. So I want to be careful there, not to say that it’s going to expand, but I just – I’m having a hard time seeing how it dropped given what we’re seeing on deposits. We have – the back half of the year has a big, and as Lynn mentioned in her comments as a huge amount of deposits that are repricing. And given that we were able to hold our loan yield. It’s going to be about the pay-offs and that’s going to probably affect our margin a little bit more, but I’m optimistic there. On pricing, in terms of loans, we are – obviously, we are building this bank around being a commercial bank, that’s relationship-based. And so our lenders know what they’re doing. And we’re getting paid for execution and structure more than we are competing on rate base deals that we can buy in the market. We are trying to compete for quality deals, but now that we have more visibility to the future and the economy is looking more healthy, while we’re always prioritizing quality and credit quality, we feel more comfortable structuring deals, because we have visibility in terms of what’s going on, and you get paid for restructuring. So across the board, I would say, that our production was pretty good in our yields where our new production was very, very good. And as I’m looking at my little cheat sheet here in almost every class, it was flatter up. So it feels like we’re going to be able to hold it, David, based on what we see now.

Okay, that’s right.

I can add. Let me just add a little bit related to PPP, I know it has a little bit of noise there. I would say that the accelerated accretion between the two quarters because of forgiveness didn’t have a significant impact. I think on Page 9 in the presentation, we lay out the yields by loan product. And then we also make the comments regarding sort of what those – the benefit of prepayment penalties, the accelerated accretion sort of the noise associated with non-accrual loans. And we had more of that in Q4 compared to Q1. I think the bottom line is the core loan yield and sort of what we’re able to compete and fund that by, in the case of SFR’s, only went down about 7 basis points. So I would say generally, I think it’s still challenging there. Maybe there’s still be some pressure, but then if we can keep up and have opportunity on the funding side, we see that coming down. So core loan yields came down about 7 basis points. Our cost of funds also, our deposits came down about 7 basis points. When you talk about PPP specifically, it’s having a smaller contribution, I’d say to overall earnings, because as the volumes a little bit lower. The period of time that we’re amortizing the PPP fees over as longer based on the performance of the SBA. And so the forgiveness is taking longer. So that’s a smaller contribution. But then if you were to remove SBA, altogether and looking at that page you would see that, our loan yields would actually go up, because that product is yielding lower than our overall average loan yields relative to the first quarter. And I think, we talk about the fact that the SBA, PPP loans, we were able to find $132 million in the first quarter. I contributed to some of our fee income, I would say that there is a remaining $5.3 million, that will come in. We set those up with an 18-month life. So we’re at a quarter into it.

Yes. And David, on the production yields, we’re talking about overall portfolio, but then, when we talk about production yield, I mentioned that went up in almost every class. So, it went up in – it actually went up a little bit in multifamily. Construction was flat. C&I was actually up. SBA was – ex-PPP was roughly flat maybe a little bit down, but there wasn’t much of that. And then so the, the big mover with CRE. And we were really competitive on CRE loans. Our loan yield went down quite a bit. We did some larger high quality credit loans there that affected our yield. I see that yield being on production in terms of a little bit down, but it’s a big growth area for us and we’re competing on some super high quality credits and I’m comfortable with that. So on an overall basis, as Lynn said our production yield excluding PPP were not quarter-over-quarter.

That’s encouraging, and definitely exception the rule. Maybe just on the market for new hires in your hiring pipeline, with bonuses paid out, just kind of a buzz around what you guys are doing and the changes that you’re making. Have you seen more of an opportunity to add talent and people want to join the organization?

Well, obviously, with the addition of Alex Kweskin, when you get somebody, who is coming from a large bank, has a very senior job, wants to come over here and help us build what we’re building here, we feel gratified by that, and it’s a reflection I think of what we’re doing. There is a lot of excitement, in terms of what we’re doing. This is a great place to be. We’re not having a problem finding talent. We have an incredible talent team that brings on, that recruits and finds great folks worse. We’re thrilled about the people that are going to be joining us from Pac Merc. There is a lot of talent over there. And so, between the two of those, I think we’re feeling good.

Yes, that’s great. Thanks.

Appreciate it.

And our next question today comes from Matthew Clark at Piper Sandler. Please go ahead.

Hey, good morning.

Good morning, Matt.

Good morning.

Hey, maybe just first on the core margin, I think it was around 3.14% this quarter, new production yields being up a little bit. I mean do you feel like this is the bottom and we can expand from here with additional relief on the funding side?

I mean you see what I said, I don’t see – I was caught by the margin, I think Lynn and I both saw the margin go down a little bit more than we expected this quarter. But I don’t – we were talking about the other day, we’re running some models and neither of us right now expected to go down. That’s not to say it won’t, but on a core basis, I think we both think that there is more room on the upside. And it’s probably coming less from drop in deposit costs as much as it did in the past. So it’s really on a core basis going to come from the combination of holding our loan yield and dropping deposit costs as opposed to just deposit costs outpacing loan rates dropping. I think loan rates might stay relative to where they are. We get the benefit of deposit costs going down. What do you think, Lynn?

Yes. So I think I would say – I would love to characterize this as the new low watermark. But if you think there are some things that remain a little bit unpredictable, and I think the main thing that ended up being different this quarter than maybe expectation was a significant decrease in the prepayment penalties. We did have a substantial amount last quarter. We did have a lot of prepayments, it’s not at the same level. So if we factor that variability out, as you said looking at the core margin, I think that the loan yield does have a little bit of pressure on it, and your balancing growth, against CEOs, but we still have room to move on the funding side down. So I think there is opportunity, but so a challenging environment. So I think that’s where we’re at right now.

Yes. We’re hesitant to say, it’s not going to go down, because I think we both believe that the best thing we can do for this company is put on high quality earning assets. And if you – it’s a trade-off. And if we find the volume that’s going to grow earnings, we want the flexibility to do that and not be held to while the margin suffered. And so we’re looking at whatever is going to drive earnings within the box of credit quality, if that makes sense.

Yes, okay. And then just shifting gears to the Pac Merc deal, have you, any – have you guys kind of relooked at the cost savings potential, just 35% seems low to me given the overlap? And maybe just your updated thoughts on the potential savings there?

You wanted to take that first, Lynn?

Sure. So I think that it is important that, when we were announcing and modeling that, I think we had conservative and something that’s absolutely achievable. I think as we continue to look at it, there is probably some more upside relative to that, as we start to take a closer look at the operation. So don’t know that I’m willing to kind of circle a number right now, but there is probably something north of 35%.

36%, Lynn.

Thank you.

Yes, 36%.

No, look, we think that there is opportunity there that will materialize. And I think we’ll be in a better position to give kind of more guidance next quarter, but it’s going to be about 35%.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Yes.

And our next question today comes from Tim Coffey of Janney. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning, everybody.

Good morning, Tim.

Regards to the big chunk of deposits that Lynn was talking about repricing later this year. Do you have a – like a targeted magnitude in mind, or something you can share with us, because there seems to be a big difference between where those deposits are priced versus where your spot rate was at the end of the quarter?

Yes, sure.

Yes. Let me, so those number – those deposits are included in our spot rate. And we have estimated that the impact of those deposits coming into the current rate environment. If we were to retain them all, at what we think are reasonable market rates would have a positive effect of about 8 basis points. So those deposits had fixed rate contracts and we are fulfilling those. And once they mature, we will bring them into the – we’ll be able to fund them in the current rate environment. I think that we have a low percent of wholesale deposits, right now, so there may be a transition period as we work through that, but otherwise I think we’ll be bringing those into the current deposit rates.

I mean we have $580 million that are going to mature through the end of the year with a weighted average cost of 156 basis points.

Right. And that’s – that 8 basis point. I’m sorry, Jared, go ahead.

Yes, that that will be – I think the 8 basis points reflects what would happen, if they – we kept them all and they repriced, right, Lynn. That’s how it will affect our spot rate.

Yes.

Yes, our spot rate at the end of the quarter. So I mean there’s a whole bunch of scenarios here. One is do we need, or we’re going to need the money. And where our rates going to be down. But I think we can assume that, if you just took it down to our spot right now, 28, 24 basis points, you’re cutting out 125 basis points of $580 million.

Right, okay. And then what’s – Jared, what you think that – what’s the direction of their loan deposit ratio from here?

Well, I think excluding, obviously our merger with Pac Merc, I think that it’s probably flat to slightly rising. And I think we’re comfortable, let me go up. We’re not going to get to 110%. But I think as we trend toward high 90s and 100, we’re comfortable with that. It just feels like we have a lot of volume to put on, and the liquidity in the market is starting to be used. There is a lot of liquidity in the market and we’re benefiting from that, but it looks like loan volume is going to outpace kind of deposit growth a little bit going forward. But we’ll obviously take the higher deposits, if they come in and we’re certainly not stopping on that. But I don’t think we have a problem letting it rise a little bit. When I was just looking for the end of the – I don’t know if you have it in front of you the loan to deposit ratio at the end of the quarter.

Sure. Well, I think we’re at 93%, 94%.

Yes.

And I think that’s been in the mid to high 90s. It would be probably reasonable based on the idea that we’ll be able to purchase keep the single-family portfolio with the activate, it’s going there. Again, only purchasing things that were – that we would be willing to have originated. If we were doing that in-house with the expected activity in the warehouse portfolio, so that coming up and then in a smallest deposit growth. So that would put it somewhere in the mid to high 90s.

Okay. And then one, just my math is correct. Preferred dividend expense next quarter is going to be somewhere around $1.7 million and 1.8 million?

Excellent math.

All right. Those are my questions, and thank you.

Thanks, Tim.

And our next question comes from Gary Tenner with D.A. Davidson. Please go ahead.

Thanks, good morning.

Good morning, Gary.

Good morning.

Just wanted to ask – good morning. Just wanted to ask a couple of follow-ups on kind of the loan segments. Make sure I understand kind of the current thinking on the single-family portfolio. Should we think about the $1.25 billion as kind of the near-term level you want to maintain. And so there is greater momentum in the rest of the portfolio to mortgage like runoff, however to offset runoff, or just for a longer period of time, is this kind of a maintenance level?

I think it’s likely – I don’t – look on a $100 million on either side of it, it’s fine. There is some good loans out there, and that are yielding pretty good that our non-QM, that we actually like that are in our market. We can look at the property. We can look at the borrower and say there is no reason we shouldn’t buy that loan. That is a really high quality loan. And now that we’ve done all the work to one of the things that happen as we did all the work to figure out how do we stem the flow of this portfolio and we ended up becoming really strong and having a deep understanding of what’s out there. And so I think we want to use that knowledge to benefit our shareholders and to have high quality. So I don’t really want to peg it at a number, it’s not the area that we’re looking to grow per se, but I would say $100 million on either side, it’s probably comfortable for us.

Okay. But in either case, for the time as the rest of the portfolio grows, the percentage is going to decline.

Yes. That’s correct. That’s correct.

Sorry, Lynn. I think…

I agree. No, no. I agree with your comment and kind of Jared point kind of plus or minus, that the portfolios had about a 30% payoff occurring. And then so while we are keeping pace, yes, I think there is some variation on either side. What’s available that we’re willing to purchase that we understand. And we think there’s some good product out there, but then how does that compare to what we’re seeing in the refi activity. So we think to not peg it at a number and to understand with both sides is helpful.

Yes.

And Gary, I would say that to the extent that multifamily, which stayed relatively flat quarter-over-quarter went down a little bit, and we’re still putting on a high quality bridge multifamily, but the permanent multifamily got highly, highly competitive. I mean it was in the – in some cases it was below 3% and we weren’t competing there. And so if I saw, if we had a payoff there, I mean and single-family was available, and it was safer and we could stem the runoff, I would have done that, too. And so as opposed to being aggressive in C&I, or some places where there is a lot less visibility in the market. As I mentioned we’re trying to keep earning assets at on an average basis at the right level. So there is potential for multifamily there as well, where the secondary market is not as liquid, as it is for single-family. But that looks like it’s slowed down. The multifamily trading, it looks like it has slowed down quite a bit, and again our activity there has been pretty good. So – and I know we have come up this quarter. So I don’t see that as being a contributor, but it could.

Okay, thanks. And then just – I think you have the multi, or excuse me, the mortgage warehouse balances embedded in kind of a larger line item within C&I. Can you tell us what the actual this mortgage warehouse balances were at quarter-end?

Sure. Lynn, do you have the number?

Yes. They were just over $1.1 billion. So in the back of the [indiscernible] end of the year they were at $1.34 billion, so they were closer to $1.3 billion. So there is a majority back on Page 22, we show a summary of our C&I portfolio, the finance group, the $1.22 billion. This represents – C&I represents about $1.1 billion of that total.

Warehouse.

Okay. I wasn’t sure, what the rate that was the dominant part of that, okay.

Yes. And we’re…

The mortgage…

Sorry. I mean we’ve said that, if we get to 1.4, that’s not – does not crazy. But we’re not going to get drunk on it. So we’re keeping within a range of comfort. And it depends on what else is flowing.

Okay, great. My other questions were answered.

Thanks. Thanks, Gary.

And our next question comes from Jacque Bohlen with KBW. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning.

Good morning, Jacque.

Hi, Jacque.

Jared, you could have touched on this in your discussion with Gary, but I just wanted to get some additional color. The multifamily, so it sounds like that market has stabilized you know that there was a lot of rate pressures that drove some of the runoff in the fourth quarter and you’re just not seeing that anymore?

It’s not to say it won’t come back, but we really didn’t see it in the fourth quarter – in the first quarter as much as we did in prior quarters. It look like it stabilized for whatever reason. And rates stabilized in the first quarter for us. It’s still a highly competitive market, but that’s what we saw in the first quarter.

Okay. And then just one last one for me, everything else has already been asked and answered, but in terms of, and I realize this is probably a challenging thing to predict. But just in terms of the investment and alternative energy partnership, is there anything left in there that could drive that kind of a magnitude again going forward?

You’re talking about the expense of the charge that we incurred in the first quarter.

Yes. Yes, the loss in the quarter.

Yes. Yes. So Jacque, I didn’t write gaps for this. But I think if you go back and look over, I think the historical accounting for this, the way the accounting works is, we take our first quarter write down or charge to – I think market to – market effectively. And then we then recognize gains over the remaining quarters. So as a debit in the first quarter, and then we should see moderate gains, the rest of the accounting periods in 2021, so…

Okay.

Yes.

And then forgive my ignorance on this, but I recall that historically in the previous year that used to have at least, I think it does, the year is kind of blend. It used to have a big impact on taxes, but I don’t think that’s the case in the quarter. Am I correct on that? That, that was all SARS-driven?

Yes, you’re correct. So the investments in alternative energy partnerships achieve a tax benefit in the quarter, the investment is made. All of the subsequent accounting is above the line. And there is not necessarily a tax benefits in taxes. And you’re correct to be at the lower effective tax rate was due to the stock appreciation rights tax benefit that we got to recognize this quarter.

Okay, great. Thank you. Sorry, don’t deal with those all that much. Thank you. That’s all I had.

No problem. Thanks, Jacque.

Thank you.

And ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today’s question-and-answer session and today’s conference call. We thank you all for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect your lines. Have a wonderful day.