Ted Klinck: Sure. Certainly, when we bought MNO, that was not the business plan. Sidley Austin, I think their leases going until 2028 or so. But as we got into it, their growth needs we are just thrilled that we were able to accommodate their growth needs. They loved McKinney & Olive and would love to stay, but we couldn’t accommodate them. The building is full, and everybody seems pleased with the buildings. So we just — we weren’t able to accommodate their growth. So it just is very fortunate that we have the space down the street. In terms of the other activity in the building or just our development pipeline in general, obviously, we signed 157,000 square feet in the first quarter. We’ve got another, I’d call it, 125,000 square feet of prospects, strong prospects that we’ve either agreed and we’re papering or we’re close to agreeing to.
It’s throughout our development pipeline. Of that 125, virtually every one of our development projects has a prospect — strong prospect. So we’re looking forward to moving the needle a little bit more there. And then we’ve got over 800,000 square feet of recent tour activity. That’s on top of the 125,000 square feet of strong prospects. So activity seems to be picking up. We have a lot of work to do to get those over the goal line and get done. But we couldn’t be more thrilled with really the activity. Certainly, we’re getting a lot of deals signed at 23Springs. But across our development pipeline, the activity seems to be picking up.
Operator: Thank you. We have the next question from Rob Stevenson with Janney.
Robert Stevenson: Good morning, guys. Ted, how much of that up to an additional $150 million of dispositions is somewhat dependent on redeployment opportunities. I mean, would you sell $225 million and just either pay down debt or sit on the cash and fund the development pipeline if needed?
Ted Klinck: Yes, Peter. I think we would. It’s not dependent on redeploying into acquisitions or development. This is just doing our normal cadence and sell them like we have, I’m sorry, yes, Rob. So really it’s not, it’s just identifying assets to create some liquidity to get our dry powder ready to take advantage of opportunities at the time. But it’s not going to be dependent on us buying something.
Robert Stevenson: Okay. And then your commentary about lack of acquisitions, is that due to assets — the assets available right now aren’t of the right quality or location? Or is it mostly the pricing is still too high or some combination? What’s the thing that’s sort of making the acquisition environment not advantageous to you right now?
Ted Klinck: I think it’s a combination of all three of those, right? So the assets that have sold don’t meet the quality. There are several out there now, I’d say, a handful of assets that are sort of going through a pricing exercise and so we’re going to be patient. We’re doing a lot of practice underwriting and all that. But it’s certainly got to be the quality. Most importantly, it’s got to be the location and certainly pricing as well. So we continue to monitor. We’re hanging around the hoop and we’ll see where it plays out. But certainly, there’s nothing imminent by any stretch.
Robert Stevenson: Okay. And then if a Dallas acquisition or development opportunity came up over the next year, would that still likely be in a JV? Or are you comfortable at this point able to be going solo on a deal in that market?
Ted Klinck: Yes. Well, first, I’d tell you, I think it’s — our entry into Dallas could not have gone better. I think we picked the right partner and it’s in and out every day. In fact, we had our Board meeting in Dallas last week, and the Granite guys joined us for dinner and tours and this like-minded of a JV partners Highwoods is probably ever have. So we’re thrilled with our partnership. Now having said that, our goal is to continue to grow Dallas, and it’s with Granite great. But I can certainly see an opportunity that we may — they may not be interested in that we would go ahead and do on our own. We feel very comfortable with that market now.
Robert Stevenson: All right. And then last one for me. Brendan, what is the — when do you expect to know the outcome of the bulk of the property tax savings potentially? And what’s the magnitude of the swing there in that range? How much should we talk about how material is that?
Brendan Maiorana: Yes, Rob, it’s a good question. It’s meaningful, there’s no doubt about that. I would say that I think we will have more clarity in Q2 and then even more clarity as we get into Q3. But I mean, there’s certainly a possibility in terms of challenging some of the assessments that these could drag on beyond 2024. So we will see where that is. But it could certainly swing us a few pennies in either direction, depending on what the ultimate resolution of these assessments are.
Robert Stevenson: And where did you — are you just in the middle in terms of the guidance? How is that impacted into the guidance?
Brendan Maiorana: Yes. We have assumed savings within the guidance. We haven’t assumed at the top end of what is possible. So I think that it is roughly in the middle in terms of kind of the high end and the low end in terms of what we have factored in or I would say more than what’s in the middle, I think it’s really where we think the most likely outcome is going to be.
Robert Stevenson: Okay. That’s helpful. Thanks, guys. I appreciate the time.
Operator: Thank you, Rob. We now have Michael Lewis from Truist.
