MH / CL Decisions
Judgements that change what a report MEANS — answered here, rendered on
the report tab. Each row's evidence is measured right now, not
transcribed.
ir-purpose
MH
Scope
DECIDED
Is report 17 an internal MH/CL control document, or does any part of it go OUT to a co-investor?
Toviya Slager · Jun 11, 2026
Why it matters
It decides the standard every figure is held to. An internal sheet may show the workbook and QuickBooks disagreeing and call that a finding; a document sent to Noah Lindqvist may not. It also decides whether the Notice tab needs a Net Wire, a tax character and a wire status, none of which exist today.
What the book says now
10 positions - 10 co-investors - 3 deals. Nothing in this pack has ever been finalized or issued (0 status rows). The portal covers 9 of the 10 investors; the rest have no investor-facing surface at all.
The options
(a) internal only - the investor-facing surface is already the portal, which carries dated notices and live =XIRR() for the nine Beacon Hill investors | (b) issue the Notice tab per investor, which makes every figure on it externally quoted | (c) both, split by tab, with a finalize gate on the one that leaves the building
The first build of this pack invented institutional LPs and wrote to them. Whatever is decided here, the answer is a population that exists.
ir-family-partner-scope
MH
Scope
OPEN
Do family partners belong in an INVESTOR report at all, or is this two audiences bolted together?
Why it matters
Outside co-investors and family members of GV entities are different relationships with different reporting duties. They were put on every tab together in the first rebuild; nobody has since asked whether a reader of one wants the other.
What the book says now
8 family interests across 6 entities, against 10 co-investor positions across 3 deals. 1 schedule do not foot to 100%: Harbor LP 90.00% over 1 members
The options
(a) keep both, on their own tab - what ships today | (b) family partners move to 16 Compliance & Governance, beside the entity structure and OA terms | (c) drop them from 17 entirely; /legal/oa-review already owns them
The short schedules are known and deliberate, not an import gap - but they print without a caveat wherever this section appears.
ir-qbo-beside-workbook
MH
Sources
OPEN
Publish the QuickBooks shared-expense-payable balance beside the workbook balance?
Why it matters
They are DIFFERENT SUBJECTS - the workbook is the whole co-investment since inception, the QBO account holds only the accrued shared-expense share - so they will never agree, and showing them together invites somebody to net one against the other. Showing only one hides money that is really there.
What the book says now
0 of 10 positions map to a QBO account; 0 payable leaves are claimed by no position. Worked example - Beacon Hill / AB Investment Trust: workbook +$250,000.03 against QBO -$14,458.37. MAP IS STALE - Beacon Hill LLC:AB Investment Trust (10%), Beacon Hill LLC:Jordan Hale (20%), Beacon Hill LLC:Northgate Equity (20%), Beacon Hill LLC:Marsh Alpha LLC (5%), Beacon Hill LLC:Marsh Delta LLC (5%), Beacon Hill LLC:Marsh Family Investment Tr (4%), Beacon Hill LLC:Simon Nakata (1%), Eastgate Apartments NWLP:Halvorsen (40%), Gulfside Industrial:Harborview Holdings (NRB - 12.20%), Yardley:Halvorsen (20%) no longer in the chart
The options
(a) side by side, each labelled with what it covers - what this pack now does | (b) workbook only, and surface the QBO tree on /shared-expenses instead | (c) build a real reconciliation of the overlapping rows, as the asset side already has in shared_expense_schedule_service.bridge()
The mapping is DECLARED, never inferred: the workbook's "Theo Marsh" is QuickBooks' "Marsh Family Investment Tr", and a name-similarity match would pair him with Marsh Alpha.
ir-bashert-state-tax
MH
Allocation
OPEN
Bashert charges Illinois state tax at 50% each to Titan and Regency, who are 25% partners. Is that right? RESOLVED - YES: it is NONRESIDENT WITHHOLDING, not the entity's own tax.
Why it matters
CL, 2026-08-30: Titan and Regency are NEW YORK investors, so Illinois nonresident withholding applies to THEM and not to MH. The two nonresident partners therefore carry 100% of it between them and MH carries none - which is correct, not a contradiction. It is the same shape as Northeast, where PA tax remitted on behalf of Halvorsen runs at 100% rather than her 40%.
What the book says now
0 State Taxes rows on the Bashert tab, $0.00 across both investors, 2012-2016. Correctly allocated: nonresident withholding follows RESIDENCY, not the deal share. The $0.00 that a 25% reading would have "recovered" per investor was never an overcharge.
The options
SETTLED - no correction is due and nothing is owed back. Do NOT "normalise" these rows to the 25% deal share; that would move real money on a misreading.
Illinois levies TWO different taxes through the same payee: the entity's own Personal Property Replacement Tax, which follows the deal share, and nonresident withholding, which follows residency. Payee and description are identical for both. Check where the partner is resident before reading an allocation as wrong.
ir-abstained-deals
CL
Coverage
OPEN
Five workbook tabs are abstained on and one QBO deal has no workbook tab. Bring them in, or state the boundary?
Why it matters
The parser refuses a tab it cannot read rather than guessing, which is right - but the report currently says nothing about what it is not covering, so its totals read as the whole book.
What the book says now
0 QBO payable leaves are claimed by no position: . All are at zero today, so no money is hidden - but nothing on the pack said they existed.
The options
(a) state the boundary on the pack - what this pack now does | (b) extend the parser to the three loan amortisation tabs, whose participant split differs per tab | (c) give Kohl & Sandoval #2 a workbook tab so it stops being QBO-only
227 Woehr, Mercy - Winslow and 1600 Darlington are loan amortisation schedules laid out differently on each tab. Northeast Old DNU is superseded and reading it would double the deal.
ir-commitment-terms
CL
Columns
DECIDED
The retired template carried Commitment / Funded / Unfunded, Admission Date, Side Letter and Key Terms. Rebuild them from the executed OAs?
Toviya Slager · Jul 06, 2026
Why it matters
They were dropped with the invented LPs that populated them, but the underlying facts are real for co-investors and /legal/oa-review already reads the documents that state them. CoInvestorPosition.commitment exists and nothing fills it.
What the book says now
10 of 10 positions carry a commitment figure today. The workbook records what has been CHARGED, never what was COMMITTED, so no amount of parsing it will produce these columns.
The options
(a) rebuild from the OAs via /legal/oa-review | (b) commitment only, which is the one with a column waiting for it | (c) leave them out - the workbook is a running expense ledger, not a subscription record
Do not infer a commitment from the largest contribution - that is a floor, not a commitment.
ir-communication-log
CL
Coverage
DECIDED
The Communication Log needs three feeds joined that nothing joins today. Build it, or retire the tab?
Morgan Hale · Aug 30, 2026
Why it matters
It has returned zero rows since it was written. An empty tab that stays empty is indistinguishable from a broken one, and it is the only tab in this pack with no source.
What the book says now
0 rows, from 3 unjoined systems. For comparison the rest of the pack carries 50 transactions across 10 positions.
The options
(a) build it - portal broadcasts, add-in announcement emails and document releases | (b) retire it, as "Annual Report Data" already was | (c) leave it as a declared gap, which is what it is now
Retiring it is a real option and not a failure - GV writes no partner letters, and the per-investor statement already lives in the portal.