CHICAGO | Economic & Business Development

[Justin_Chicago]

MortgageHippo raises $2.25M to help lenders give you a mortgage online

MortgageHippo, a mortgage-technology startup based in Chicago, has raised about $2.25 million in seed funding, the company announced Tuesday.

The company was founded in 2013 as a consumer-focused online mortgage broker. Today, it offers the service as a white-label software platform for lenders who don’t have the resources to build a platform for themselves.

“There’s so much momentum in the mortgage industry with new technology coming in, we want to be at the forefront,” said MortgageHippo co-founder and CEO Valentin Saportas, noting that leading online lender Quicken Loans built its own digital mortgage platform. “It’s putting pressure on every mortgage lender in the country. We’re bridging the technology gap to lenders.”

The funding will go primarily growing MortgageHippo's team, mainly in sales and technology development, Saportas said. He expects to add five employees immediately and possibly more later this year. The company currently has eight employees and operates out of Catapult in Chicago.

Article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/bluesk...418-story.html

[Randomguy34]

Brunswick Group Expands U.S. Footprint with New Office in Chicago

CHICAGO, April 18, 2017 /PRNewswire/ -- Brunswick Group, a leading corporate advisory firm, today announced the expansion of its U.S. footprint with the opening in Chicago of its fifth American office.

Brunswick's Chicago office will serve as its Midwestern hub, providing senior counsel to the Midwest's leading regional and global companies on critical issues and stakeholder relations, including mergers and acquisitions, IPOs, employee engagement, crisis, litigation, and executive transitions.

Jayne Rosefield, previously a Partner in the New York office, will head up the Chicago office. Rosefield joined Brunswick in 2005 from JP Morgan and has driven the growth of Brunswick's U.S. Consumer Industries offer. Her transaction highlights include AB InBev's $107bn acquisition of SABMiller; Kraft's $20bn acquisition and integration of Cadbury plc and $55bn merger with Heinz to become Kraft Heinz; Burger King's $11bn acquisition of Tim Hortons to become Restaurant Brands International and Sysco's $8.2bn proposed acquisition of U.S. Foods.

Rosefield said: "Chicago's diverse network of global businesses and forward-thinking leaders make it a natural choice in which to establish a Brunswick presence. It is my privilege to open the firm's fifth American office in such a vibrant and important market."

Joining Rosefield in Chicago is Christopher Hannegan, a Partner who heads Brunswick's global employee engagement offer. This specialist offer helps CEOs and board members address people-related critical business issues including leadership, talent, culture, and strategy execution. Hannegan has nearly 25 years of experience, most of it spent in Chicago where he has advised over 100 companies in the Chicagoland and Midwest regions.

Susan Gilchrist, Group Chief Executive Officer, said: "With so many of the world's great companies based in the Midwest, we wanted to have a strong presence here too, supporting our clients on their biggest issues."

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...300440633.html

[left of center]

Caterpillar Inc. announced today it is locating its new global headquarters in north suburban Deerfield.

(CBS) – The earth-moving equipment manufacturer, based in Peoria for decades, says proximity to O’Hare International Airport and access to the Metra passenger rail line were factors.

“This site gives our employees many options to live in either an urban or suburban environment. We know we have to compete for the best talent to grow our company, and this location will appeal to our diverse, global team, today and in the future,” Caterpillar CEO Jim Umpleby said in a news release.

Caterpillar has a multi-year leasing agreement with Corporate 500 office park, the company said. Caterpillar expects about 100 employees to relocate this year, and 300 people will be at the Deerfield site when it is built out by mid-2018.

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2017/04/...for-global-hq/

It's a bit upsetting that they skipped over moving downtown, but still beats them potentially leaving the state. They might open a satellite office in the Loop regardless (or expand on an already existing one). Either way, a win for the metro area.

[marothisu]

Although it sucks they won't be moving to the city, it is still a win for not only the state for having them keep in the state but also the metro area anyway.

[killaviews]

What's the benefit in being in Lake County as opposed to Cook County?

Is there a tax in city or Cook county that sends businesses just across the county line? Lake County is far. I don't get it. Lake County is punching far above it's weight class in terms of Fortune 500 companies. There must be a reason.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by killaviews

What's the benefit in being in Lake County as opposed to Cook County?

Is there a tax in city or Cook county that sends businesses just across the county line? Lake County is far. I don't get it. Lake County is punching far above it's weight class in terms of Fortune 500 companies. There must be a reason.

"Lake County is far." No, it's far from Chicago. Not everyone thinks like that and not everyone even cares about being in the city. Evidenced by the large amount of mansions in Lake County and HNW individuals. As far as suburbs go, if you are wealthy and want a nice $5M mansion in that setting, it's a great place.

My guess is some of the top people at the company wanted this, and wanted their homes "close" to the office. One of the major factors was being close to O'Hare. Deerfield is 17 miles from O'Hare. The Loop is 18 miles along I-90. Basically the same. It probably comes down to most of the c-suite wanted their $5M mansions with land instead of $5M condos with views and they got a better deal on real estate price in Deerfield. The distance to the airport is basically the same.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by marothisu

"Lake County is far." No, it's far from Chicago. Not everyone thinks like that and not everyone even cares about being in the city. Evidenced by the large amount of mansions in Lake County and HNW individuals. As far as suburbs go, if you are wealthy and want a nice $5M mansion in that setting, it's a great place.

My guess is some of the top people at the company wanted this, and wanted their homes "close" to the office. One of the major factors was being close to O'Hare. Deerfield is 17 miles from O'Hare. The Loop is 18 miles along I-90. Basically the same. It probably comes down to most of the c-suite wanted their $5M mansions with land instead of $5M condos with views and they got a better deal on real estate price in Deerfield. The distance to the airport is basically the same.

Not to mention that these execs are coming from Peoria, so it's not like they are die hard urbanists to begin with

[killaviews]

Originally Posted by marothisu

"Lake County is far." No, it's far from Chicago. Not everyone thinks like that and not everyone even cares about being in the city. Evidenced by the large amount of mansions in Lake County and HNW individuals. As far as suburbs go, if you are wealthy and want a nice $5M mansion in that setting, it's a great place.

My guess is some of the top people at the company wanted this, and wanted their homes "close" to the office. One of the major factors was being close to O'Hare. Deerfield is 17 miles from O'Hare. The Loop is 18 miles along I-90. Basically the same. It probably comes down to most of the c-suite wanted their $5M mansions with land instead of $5M condos with views and they got a better deal on real estate price in Deerfield. The distance to the airport is basically the same.

Chicago is the center of the metropolitan area. These companies in Lake County attract employees from places that are far - the South Side, the South Suburbs, Naperville, Aurora. It is close if you live in the North Shore, but I bet the vast majority of employees working in Lake County don't live in the North Shore. A lot of people will do whatever it takes to have a good job. So now there are thousands of people willing to put up with an awful commute because of a handful of senior executives with mansions on the North Shore.

That's a huge waste of resources.

[marothisu]

Originally Posted by killaviews

Chicago is the center of the metropolitan area. These companies in Lake County attract employees from places that are far - the South Side, the South Suburbs, Naperville, Aurora. It is close if you live in the North Shore, but I bet the vast majority of employees working in Lake County don't live in the North Shore. A lot of people will do whatever it takes to have a good job. So now there are thousands of people willing to put up with an awful commute because of a handful of senior executives with mansions on the North Shore.

That's a huge waste of resources.

Thousands of people? The offices, at least according to what I read, will be a max of about 300 people. This is mostly C-suite, other executives, and operations people moving.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...erfield-for-hq

The new headquarters should house 100 employees by the end of the year; there will be 300 at the site in mid-2018.

Cat has an office downtown already in the Merchandise Mart (http://www.chicagotribune.com/g00/bl....google.com%2F) which is full of the more "creative job people" which is where this is more important. If it was moving 3000 people, it would be different, but it's not. This is operations moving and just a few hundred people. It would be great if they were downtown, but after being in Peoria for so long, they still did very well for themselves and I doubt they're too concerned with people not wanting to do business with them because they're in Deerfield instead of the Loop.

[the urban politician]

^ Lake County is a great place to live if you want to live in the suburbs. That's all there is to it.

[nomarandlee]

I read that they hope to be in their offices 3rd Q of 18. And that they also chose Deerfield because of their train connection. I can't think of any major unoccupied buildings at either Deerfield station and it seems a bit quick to construct a new office.

I've always thought that the Lake-Cook Metra station would make an excellent suburban TOD commercial center with plenty of growth potential. Given the early move in estimate, I guess we won't be seen that here though unfortunately.

[sukwoo]

Originally Posted by nomarandlee

I read that they hope to be in their offices 3rd Q of 18. And that they also chose Deerfield because of their train connection. I can't think of any major unoccupied buildings at either Deerfield station and it seems a bit quick to construct a new office.

I've always thought that the Lake-Cook Metra station would make an excellent suburban TOD commercial center with plenty of growth potential. Given the early move in estimate, I guess we won't be seen that here though unfortunately.

Looks like they're picking an office a block or two from the Lake-Cook Metra station. Moving into the office space vacated by Beam Suntory when they relocated to Chicago.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...erfield-for-hq
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...419-story.html

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by sukwoo

Looks like they're picking an office a block or two from the Lake-Cook Metra station.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/artic...erfield-for-hq
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...419-story.html

yeah, it's located ~1/4 mile north of the north end of the lake-cook platforms, across a parking lot.

it's a bummer they passed on a downtown location, but this location is petty easy for reverse metra commuters.

[sukwoo]

Is Lake-Cook literally the only Metra station within walking distance of an office campus? I can't think of any others.

[sentinel]

I agree with this, and have been (ineloquently) saying this in the forum a couple of times - any bragging rights about size are secondary, I've highlighted what I think are critical benefits - come at me, doubter-bros:

Commentary: Chicago should annex adjoining suburbs
By Edward McClelland

"...There's more than simple civic pride on the line here. Sitting atop the standings with the anchors of the East and West coasts is essential to Chicago's reputation as a global city.

"The farther we fall down that list, the less appeal the city and region have," says Alden Loury, director of research and evaluation for the Metropolitan Planning Council...

...Unlike our fellow Midwestern population losers Detroit, Cleveland and St. Louis, Chicago has something to offer its suburbs: lower taxes. Because it contains so much valuable commercial, industrial and residential property, Chicago's 6.9 percent property tax rate is the lowest in Cook County, according to the Cook County clerk's office. The village of Riverdale, which lies across the Calumet River from a Chicago neighborhood of the same name, pays 29.7 percent. There's a long list of border suburbs where property tax rates are double those of the city, including Cicero, Stickney, Bridgeview, Bedford Park, Evergreen Park, Oak Lawn, Blue Island, Calumet Park and Dolton.(Suburbs that join the city would be able to keep their school districts, since those entities are separate from municipalities.)...

...What does Chicago have to gain? More people mean more tax dollars from the state and federal government. And vacant suburban land would become more desirable at the city's lower tax rate.."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...413-story.html

If you have a valid counter-argument as to why this isn't a good idea, let's hear it; this is a discussion forum.

[sukwoo]

Originally Posted by sentinel

I agree with this, and have been (ineloquently) saying this in the forum a couple of times - any bragging rights about size are secondary, I've highlighted what I think are critical benefits - come at me, doubter-bros:

Commentary: Chicago should annex adjoining suburbs
By Edward McClelland

"...There's more than simple civic pride on the line here. Sitting atop the standings with the anchors of the East and West coasts is essential to Chicago's reputation as a global city.

"The farther we fall down that list, the less appeal the city and region have," says Alden Loury, director of research and evaluation for the Metropolitan Planning Council...

...Unlike our fellow Midwestern population losers Detroit, Cleveland and St. Louis, Chicago has something to offer its suburbs: lower taxes. Because it contains so much valuable commercial, industrial and residential property, Chicago's 6.9 percent property tax rate is the lowest in Cook County, according to the Cook County clerk's office. The village of Riverdale, which lies across the Calumet River from a Chicago neighborhood of the same name, pays 29.7 percent. There's a long list of border suburbs where property tax rates are double those of the city, including Cicero, Stickney, Bridgeview, Bedford Park, Evergreen Park, Oak Lawn, Blue Island, Calumet Park and Dolton.(Suburbs that join the city would be able to keep their school districts, since those entities are separate from municipalities.)...

...What does Chicago have to gain? More people mean more tax dollars from the state and federal government. And vacant suburban land would become more desirable at the city's lower tax rate.."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/o...413-story.html

If you have a valid counter-argument as to why this isn't a good idea, let's hear it; this is a discussion forum.

If the pre-existing suburban school districts are maintained as independent entities, I don't see the tax savings.

[sentinel]

^Why assume that they would be maintained as independent entities?

[sukwoo]

Originally Posted by sentinel

^Why assume that they would be maintained as independent entities?

Because that's what this proposal proposes.

From the article:
"There's a long list of border suburbs where property tax rates are double those of the city, including Cicero, Stickney, Bridgeview, Bedford Park, Evergreen Park, Oak Lawn, Blue Island, Calumet Park and Dolton.(Suburbs that join the city would be able to keep their school districts, since those entities are separate from municipalities.)"

[sentinel]

Originally Posted by sukwoo

Because that's what this proposal proposes.

From the article:
"There's a long list of border suburbs where property tax rates are double those of the city, including Cicero, Stickney, Bridgeview, Bedford Park, Evergreen Park, Oak Lawn, Blue Island, Calumet Park and Dolton.(Suburbs that join the city would be able to keep their school districts, since those entities are separate from municipalities.)"

Okay, you can reset/lower the tax rate to a consistent one for an entire 'greater Chicago', while maintaining the individual school districts...and potentially not just for real estate taxes. Because the individual suburban school districts are already doing better than CPS, so whenever a district tries to pass a referendum (like the recent successful ones in Brookfield, Oak Park and Evanston), the tax rate can theoretically not go up nearly as much if there is already a lower baseline because they are all part of a 'greater Chicago.' In Brookfield, for example, for the past few years there has been a decent influx of younger families replacing older retirees that have moved to the Sun Belt or passed away. The schools are overcrowded, so the $20 million referendum is to build annexes for the grade school and middle school. For close family members that live there and have two small children that will be going to those schools in the next few years, it will add $260 a year to their taxes ($7,000). But if Brookfield was part of Chicago, why can't that annual real estate tax be lowered by, let's say a conservative 15% (or more), while still maintaining the separate school district (Riverside-Brookfield)?

[sukwoo]

Originally Posted by sentinel

Okay, you can reset/lower the tax rate to a consistent one for an entire 'greater Chicago', while maintaining the individual school districts...and potentially not just for real estate taxes. Because the individual suburban school districts are already doing better than CPS, so whenever a district tries to pass a referendum (like the recent successful ones in Brookfield, Oak Park and Evanston), the tax rate can theoretically not go up nearly as much if there is already a lower baseline because they are all part of a 'greater Chicago.' In Brookfield, for example, for the past few years there has been a decent influx of younger families replacing older retirees that have moved to the Sun Belt or passed away. The schools are overcrowded, so the $20 million referendum is to build annexes for the grade school and middle school. For close family members that live there and have two small children that will be going to those schools in the next few years, it will add $260 a year to their taxes ($7,000). But if Brookfield was part of Chicago, why can't that annual real estate tax be lowered by, let's say a conservative 15% (or more), while still maintaining the separate school district (Riverside-Brookfield)?

What you are suggesting is unprecedented and likely unconstitutional. You're essentially suggesting that, for example, Chicago taxpayers subsidize the (wealthier) taxpayers of Oak Park without having any say in the election of the Oak Park school district board. And of course even residents on the Chicago side of Austin Boulevard would be ineligible to attend Oak Park schools.

Asides from the schools issue (which at least in Oak Park represent 2/3 of the tax bill), I doubt village residents would be willing to trade OP Police with CPD. Perhaps some of the south suburbs which are truly dire financial straits would be willing to merge with Chicago, but then why would Chicago want the burden of providing services to these poverty-stricken towns?