Gary Pugh for Cheyenne City Council Ward 1

Remarks to City Council on Chapter 1.28 - Administrative Warrants

January 13, 2026

(Youtube Link)

The following are my prepared remarks delivered during public comment at the Cheyenne City Council meeting on January 13, 2026, regarding the proposed administrative inspection warrant ordinance.

Good evening, Mayor Collins, members of the Council. My name is Gary Pugh, and I've lived in Cheyenne for five years.

I spent over twenty-one years in the United States Air Force, retiring as a Master Sergeant in charge of avionics for a fighter wing. On my first day in uniform, I raised my right hand and swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. I took that oath seriously then, and I take it seriously now 

That's why I'm here tonight—because Chapter 1.28 asks you to create a warrant that isn't really a warrant at all.

Our Wyoming Constitution, Article 1, Section 4, requires that warrants issue only upon "probable cause, supported by affidavit." That language isn't an accident. Our founders—state and federal—understood that when government can enter your home simply because it wants to check on you, you don't really own that home. You're just borrowing it 

This ordinance allows warrants to be issued merely to "determine, discover, or verify compliance." I want you to think about what that standard actually means. Every inspection exists to determine, discover, or verify compliance. That's the purpose of inspections. When the standard for getting a warrant is simply wanting to conduct an inspection, what grounds would a judge ever have to say no? The answer is none. And when a judge can't say no, you don't have judicial oversight. You have a rubber stamp.

I've heard it said that this is settled law, that the courts have blessed administrative warrants. That may be true under federal law. But Wyoming's constitution uses different language—and stronger language—than the Fourth Amendment. Article 1, Section 4 explicitly requires probable cause supported by affidavit. The Wyoming Supreme Court has repeatedly held that our state constitution provides greater protection than its federal counterpart. And the case cited by council members on social media—Hale v. City of Laramie—is about building permits and civil procedure. It says nothing about administrative warrants, nothing about the Fourth Amendment, and nothing that authorizes what you're being asked to approve tonight. I would encourage anyone citing legal authority to make sure they've actually read it.

I've also heard this is only for abandoned properties. But I've read the ordinance, and that limitation appears nowhere in the text. Verbal assurances don't bind future councils or future code enforcement officers. Once this tool exists, it will expand. That's not speculation—that's how government works.

I'm not here to question anyone's intentions. I believe you want safe buildings and accountable code enforcement. But the tools already exist. Chief Dykshorn told this council the city works well with our community on consent-based inspections. If that system is working, the question isn't why we shouldn't expand government power. The question is why we should.

I'm asking you to vote no on Chapter 1.28. Protect the constitutional rights of the people you were elected to represent. That's what real leadership looks like.

Thank you.