Cruxeon Energy+ is a clean-energy infrastructure company focused on helping municipalities and Tribal Nations stabilize long-term energy costs through locally controlled, revenue-supported energy systems.
Cruxeon Energy+ does not seek ownership of municipal assets. The model is designed to support local control, transparency, and long-term planning.
The Municipal & Indigenous Clean Energy Alliance (MICEA) is a framework that allows cities to evaluate and deploy clean energy infrastructure using locally issued revenue bonds or equivalent revenue-supported financing.
MICEA is not a mandate or program enrollment—it is an optional pathway cities may evaluate as part of their capital planning process.
Energy costs directly affect:
Utility rate stability
General fund exposure
Capital improvement planning
Economic development competitiveness
MICEA provides a planning tool that aligns energy production, financing, and long-term affordability in a single structure.
No.
The model is designed around revenue-supported financing, not general obligation debt.
No new taxes are required, and general fund exposure can be structured to be limited or excluded, subject to local policy and bond counsel review.
The bonds are issued by the municipality, a joint powers authority (JPA), utility authority, or other lawful issuing entity, consistent with state law.
Cruxeon Energy+ does not issue municipal bonds on behalf of the city.
No.
Ownership and operational control remain local, unless the city affirmatively chooses a different structure.
Cruxeon Energy+’s role is limited to technology deployment, integration, and support, as defined by contract.
Traditional procurement often locks cities into:
Long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs)
Volatile rate escalators
Limited control over generation costs
MICEA focuses on local production, predictable cost structures, and capital assets owned by or aligned with the community.
As with any infrastructure project, staff should evaluate:
Technology performance and warranties
Construction and deployment timelines
Revenue assumptions
Regulatory and interconnection considerations
Long-term operations and maintenance
Cruxeon Energy+ encourages independent review by city staff, legal counsel, financial advisors, and engineers.
Initial evaluation typically begins with:
A 30–60 minute staff-level briefing
A high-level feasibility discussion
Identification of follow-up questions for advisors
No commitment is required to proceed beyond initial evaluation.
Yes.
MICEA is designed to be complementary, not competitive.
It can be evaluated alongside:
Municipal utilities
Investor-owned utilities
CCAs or JPAs
Final integration depends on local conditions and regulatory structure.
Not necessarily.
The framework does not rely on grants or subsidies, though cities may choose to layer available programs if appropriate.
Elected officials retain their normal policy authority.
City managers may:
Evaluate feasibility
Brief elected leadership
Recommend next steps
No policy action is required to conduct an initial evaluation.
If a city chooses to continue exploring the concept, next steps may include:
Preliminary feasibility analysis
Consultation with bond counsel and financial advisors
Internal staff coordination
Optional study session with elected officials
All steps remain city-controlled.
No.
There is no exclusivity requirement and no obligation to proceed.
Cities may evaluate MICEA alongside other energy or infrastructure options.
Typically:
City Manager / Assistant City Manager
Finance Director
Public Works / Utilities Director
Sustainability or Energy staff (if applicable)
Cities may request a confidential, staff-level working session through Cruxeon Energy.
No commitments. No sales presentation. Exploratory discussion only.
No.
There is no exclusivity requirement and no obligation to proceed.
Cities may evaluate MICEA alongside other energy or infrastructure options.
Typically:
City Manager / Assistant City Manager
Finance Director
Public Works / Utilities Director
Sustainability or Energy staff (if applicable)
