How we work
One public record, the same for every reader, and paid work kept apart from it. This page covers why the register exists, the rules we hold ourselves to, who pays us, and how to work with us.
Independence Funding disclosure Working with us How entries are marked Adjacency disclosure
Why this exists
Roughly $130 billion in data center investment was blocked or delayed in a single quarter. Hundreds of state bills and live moratorium proposals have turned siting, infrastructure and public finance into a contested record.
Every number in that fight is published by someone with a position. Industry associations publish industry figures. Advocacy groups publish advocacy figures. Sponsored research on both sides often arrives with a conclusion before the reader reaches the source.
Why records degrade
Numbers lose fidelity every time they're handled — by everyone, including the people with the most reason to be careful. Not through carelessness, just the ordinary lossiness of transcription, summary and republication.
One recent example: a utility rate figure circulated in trade coverage inside a paragraph where every other number matched the Commission's own release exactly — the residential decrease, the commercial decrease, the monthly saving, the usage figure, the customer count, the effective date. One digit in the set had moved. Nothing was fabricated, and nobody was careless in any way a reader could have detected.
Surrounding accuracy is what makes a single deviation invisible.
What we sell
The record is not for sale, and it reads the same for everyone. It predates the argument, and you can check it yourself with standard tools and no reason to trust us. What we sell is speed and application: a jurisdiction read for your purpose, a site watched on a schedule, or a signed call on one site, kept separate from the record and identified as one person's judgment.
Four operating rules, and each one costs us something.
We considered organizing as a nonprofit and rejected it. Every compromised source in this market is already a nonprofit. Tax status confers nothing; donor dependence is the problem, not the cure.
- 01Same price for either side. What we charge does not depend on which side of a project you are on. A price that moved with the side would be a position.
- 02Disclose the conflict. Public bodies are named with the amount. Private clients stay confidential and are counted by buyer type, and any published finding that touches a paid engagement says so on its face.
- 03Sell to both sides in the same market. We say so at intake, every time. Taking work from one side doesn't change what the record says about the other.
- 04Grade our own client’s numbers the same way. If a figure doesn't reconcile, the client hears it privately and hears it first. It still doesn't reconcile.
We are not on a side
Calyx holds no position on whether data centers should be built, where, or under what incentives. Findings state what the record shows. Where a client wants a recommendation it comes from a named human in a separately signed document, identified as judgment sitting on top of verified facts.
Declared adjacencies
The founder is CEO and CTO of Southwest Energy Group LLC, a separate Arizona company building deployable solar generation and storage. Parts of this corpus cover behind-the-meter generation, energy storage and interconnection constraint — the category that entity operates in. The adjacency is declared in writing before any engagement in a market it could serve, priced separately, and published.
The standing adjacency disclosure names the specific instruments where the overlap arises, and the register of declarations sits on the same page.
Any elected or appointed official in a jurisdiction we cover will have their offices, terms, votes, filings and recusals in the corpus with dates attached. We say so to every prospective client before an engagement begins.
Funding disclosure
Public bodies are named here with the scope and the amount the day the engagement begins, not when it ends. Private engagements are confidential by default. They appear as a running count by buyer type, with no names or amounts, and a client who wants to be named is named.
Where a published finding touches a jurisdiction or project in which Calyx has had a paying engagement, the finding says so on its face.
That way its existence cannot be read as a response to anything.
| Public engagements | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | Client | Scope | Amount |
| No engagements to report. | |||
| Private engagements, 2026 | Count |
|---|---|
| Developers and builders | 0 |
| Lenders and investors | 0 |
| Insurers and title | 0 |
| Counsel and other | 0 |
Unpaid work is disclosed too. All three findings above are marked self-funded. Where Calyx performs verification without a client, the work is published on the same terms as paid work.
Who this is for
What a jurisdiction gets
A corpus for its own boundaries: instruments and expiry dates, abatement record by program, power and interconnection position, land use and permit posture, and the standards that apply. Every entry sourced, dated, and marked with how strongly it is held.
What a developer or lender gets
The same corpus, read for constraint rather than accountability. What a site can actually do, what it will have to prove, and which published numbers about it hold up.
Before a site is optioned, not after it is entitled.
What both get
The same answers either way. That's the whole arrangement, and it's why we can be paid by either.