Chris Lau: Morning Jamie, Chris here. Good question. As I mentioned, the totality of our partnerships with JPMorgan Asset Management right now are about $1.5 billion that could increase a little bit if we introduce debt into the most recent second joint venture. Keep in mind that strategically, those ventures are specifically focused on development. and growing our pipeline there to capture more of that incremental opportunity as we’re thinking about broader opportunities, whether that be if the MLS becomes more attractive, national builder opportunities present themselves, portfolio present themselves or opportunities to grow the development pipeline further. We look at all that opportunistically relative to the cost of capital.
equity as an example, we view that as an opportunistic weapon to potentially do more than what we’re doing right now. But we look at it relative to the opportunity on hand. And then I would also add that there is capacity on the balance sheet right now as well. We ended the second quarter at 5.3 times debt including preferred to EBITDA. And we’re comfortable taking that up into the six times area, which gives us a nice capacity to be opportunistic as well.
Jamie Feldman: Okay, that’s helpful. And then I guess just going back to the Texas tax on TWISTR, can you just talk about the — I guess, we’re a little surprised that it’s not a bigger benefit to you. So, can you talk more about what the true nuances are that you don’t think it will be much of a help. And then as you think about the 20% appraisal circuit breaker, is that not meaningful to you either. It just seemed like it was big news to us. We just want to make sure we understand what we’re missing.
Chris Lau: Yes, sure. So, look, I think the notion of it being a benefit to us in general, I think that, that is right. But ultimately, what we’re talking about here is timing, recognizing that even though there is a chance that this year is muted, those rate reductions are muted because of the post appeal value increases we’re beginning to see. I do believe that there is a positive read-through here to 2024 as the tax relief program is anticipated to keep rates compressed through at least next year. And so as we hopefully begin to see some assessment moderation as HPA pools, I could see this potentially setting up favorably into 2024.
Operator: Our next question is from Keegan Carl with Wolfe Research. Please proceed with your question.
Keegan Carl: Yes, thanks for the time guys. So your average recurring CapEx and average R&M turnover costs appeared materially higher year-over-year. Just curious how much of its driven by elevated turnover versus something else and are you experiencing more challenging CapEx trends, in particular in your legacy portfolio assets?
Bryan Smith: Hi Keegan, this is Bryan. Yes, thank you for the question. Turnover does drive higher CapEx expenses in particular. We’ve done a really good job, I think, of managing R&M and turnover costs. Part of it is a product of our increased investment in the field. We talked a little bit about that when we were discussing the Resident 360 program. They’ve done a very good job of getting these homes prepared quickly and efficiently. Some of the additional CapEx costs that we see this year can be related to inflationary pressures and also some of the delinquency resolutions that we talked about earlier in the call.
David Singelyn: Keegan, this is Dave. On the last part of your question about legacy properties and the channels in which we acquired the properties yes, we do see more cost to maintain in those homes that we acquired as existing hubs on the MLS. And looking at the quarterly numbers, it appears it’s about $850 just for the maintenance and cost to maintain component of those legacy homes. So, homes that we got from the national homebuilders are significantly less. It’s in the low $400s. And the ones that came out of our development portfolio. These are the ones that are in same home that have got some history on about 2,000 homes, about $350. So not doing rough math, it appears about 50% cheaper for the homes that were coming out of the national builders 60% cheaper for the ones that we developed ourselves.
