Nathan Race: Going back to the margin discussion, and just kind of think about some of the dynamics on the right side of the balance sheet that factor into the guidance for 4Q. Just curious to what extent you guys plan to run off some of the brokered CDs there in the first quarter. And obviously, the overnight borrowings are up versus the second quarter. But I imagine those can come down with the securitizations in the fourth quarter as well. So just trying to think about how we should think about the overall size of the right side of the balance sheet, and kind of what you guys are seeing in terms of additional core deposit growth opportunities going forward.
Todd Gipple: Sure, Nate. Yes, you’re spot on what your opening comment on what you were seeing, and that is that $295 million of overnight was really a placeholder for the securitization and the liquidity we’re going to free up here in the fourth quarter. So we did that really as a placeholder for funding until we are able to close those securitizations. So we would see that going away. We actually rolled off $103 million of the brokered in this most recent quarter and that had a $480 million average handle. So we felt really good about seeing that roll off and replacing it with core deposits. When you look at our core deposits, I mean, they were essentially static quarter-to-quarter. We liked it that way. That was somewhat intentional.
We’re trying to take some of the sting out of new deposit generation costs. Again, that’s another big lift from the securitization that gives us the ability to be a little bit more patient with deposit growth. But maybe the punch line for you in terms of the right side of the balance sheet, we would expect to fund any and all new loan growth going forward with core deposits, not with overnight, not with brokered. And so that leaves us with roughly $200 million of brokered, that’s going to mature during 2024. And we would expect to keep rolling that off and not replace it with anything but core deposits.
Nathan Race: And is the replacement costs on those broker CDs, that marginally lower than what you guys are seeing in terms of pricing on new core deposits today?
Todd Gipple: Well, new core deposits are still very pricey, of course, and so some of the big chunks come with a five handle or a five-plus handle. But we’re really fortunate to have such strong bankers and very good treasury management people and platforms. So we do continue to pick up actual core relationships. And so those blended rates when they come in, when we pick up a new treasury management client, we’re going to get some non-interest bearing, we’re going to get some money market that might be in the 2s. And then of course, we’re probably going to have to pay a little bit higher for some of their excess cash, but blended all-in, we’re really looking to try to keep that coming on, on a blended rate, somewhere close to those brokers, which again, would be in the mid to upper 4s. So really just swapping those out from a cost of funds perspective.
Nathan Race: Got it. That’s very helpful. And just maybe thinking about expenses for next year. And I know it’s a fluid situation at this point in the year in terms of thinking about next year. And I appreciate that you guys have a fairly variable cost structure relative to overall revenue. But just any guideposts in terms of how you guys are thinking about expense growth for next year? I think the historical growth, excuse me – historical goal is to limit expense goes to 5%. Is that a reasonable expectation assuming you guys have kind of the midpoint of capital markets revenue for the next 12 months?
