Overview:
Pam Colombie has stepped down as Winchester, Connecticut’s zoning agent after allegations surfaced that she filed questionable zoning violation lawsuits against businesses competing with her partner’s employers firm, Supreme Industries. The accusations, which include claims of excessive fines and selective enforcement, have sparked concerns about conflicts of interest and municipal practices in one of the state’s lowest-income towns.
WINCHESTER, CT — Pam Colombie, the former zoning agent for the Town of Winchester (also known locally as Winsted), has resigned from her role following allegations. It is claimed she misused her position to file lawsuits against local business owners. Many of these owners were competitors of her significant other’s employer’s company, Supreme Industries, Inc., an excavation and materials processing firm based in Harwinton, Connecticut.
According to multiple sources, Colombie developed a reputation for pursuing unverifiable “zoning violations” against small business and property owners. This was often in the blue-collar sector. She would levy steep daily fines — in some cases up to $1,400 per day.
These enforcement actions were reportedly filed through Kevin Nelligan, an attorney who has represented both the Town of Winchester and, previously, the neighboring City of Torrington, Connecticut.
In December 2025, Presence News confirmed that the City of Torrington had terminated its legal services contract with Nelligan. That confirmation was obtained through correspondence with the Nelligan Legal Office and corroborated by changes reflected on the firm’s Google Business listing.
Public business listings previously showed Nelligan’s law office based in Canaan, Connecticut, though that listing was later removed and marked as closed or inactive. More recently, Nelligan has listed a Winchester address as his office location. As of publication, Presence News has not independently verified whether that location is actively used as a physical office.
Presence News includes this information for transparency regarding representation and public records and will update this section if additional confirmation becomes available.
Alleged Conflict of Interest
Colombie’s partner, Dennis Colombie, serves as an estimator at Supreme Industries. (As listed publicly on his LinkedIn Profile) This is a company competing with other well-established contractors such as O&G Industries. Critics allege that Colombie’s enforcement tactics effectively discouraged residents from hiring certain contractors. This strategy would steer work toward her partner’s firm and their work associates.
One recent lawsuit targeted an elderly property owner for having an excavator on his rural property. He also displayed a small lawn sign — measuring only 11” by 8.5” — to promote his services.
The Graves Family Case
What the Winchester Documents Actually Establish (On the Record)
A. The Property Was Debt-Free Except for Town-Imposed Penalties
Court filings show that the foreclosure of 50–52 Cottage Street did not originate from a mortgage default or unpaid private debt. Instead, the action stemmed entirely from municipal civil penalties imposed under Winchester’s anti-blight ordinance.
According to the town’s complaint, the homeowner, Mr Graves, held title to the property outright, with no prior encumbrances ahead of the town’s lien. The municipality relied on Connecticut General Statutes §7-148 and Town Ordinance 180 to assess daily fines of $99 for alleged blight violations. Those fines later became the legal basis for foreclosure.
This distinction is significant: the debt that enabled foreclosure was created by the town itself, rather than arising from traditional lending or delinquent tax obligations.
B. The “Blight” Violations Were Minor, Subjective, and Correctable
The official violation notice (Exhibit A) lists maintenance-related issues, including:
- peeling paint
- damaged or loose gutters
- broken window screens
- debris in the yard
- unregistered vehicles
- damaged stairs or walkways
The notice does not allege structural collapse, habitation hazards, or imminent threats to public safety. Instead, it frames the violations as correctable maintenance conditions, granting the homeowner an opportunity to remediate or request an extension.
Critics note that such violations fall into discretionary enforcement territory, relying heavily on inspector judgment rather than objective or emergency standards.
Reporter’s Note: Presence News observed during multiple site visits that many homes throughout Winchester display conditions similar to those cited in blight violations, including yard debris, damaged gutters, broken screens, unregistered vehicles, and worn stairs—raising questions among residents about enforcement consistency.
C. The Financial Escalation Was Disproportionate
Court records show a sharp escalation between the initial enforcement action and the final foreclosure judgment:
- Initial civil penalties: approximately $25,146
- Total debt at judgment: $88,132
- Court-listed fair market value of the property: $50,000
- Land value alone: $12,000
The resulting strict foreclosure allowed the municipality to obtain title to a property valued below the total debt created through enforcement, a structure that housing advocates say raises serious proportionality and due-process concerns.
This outcome was not incidental, observers argue, but a predictable result of compounding daily penalties applied to a debt-free inherited home.
Why the Case Remains Controversial
In a town where the average annual income is approximately $38,000, critics argue that the Graves case illustrates how blight enforcement—when paired with escalating fines—can function less as a remediation tool and more as a revenue-generating mechanism. Such actions, they say, disproportionately impact elderly residents, heirs to inherited property, and homeowners without access to legal counsel.
The Town of Winchester has previously defended its enforcement policies as necessary to maintain community standards. However, housing advocates and civil-liberties groups continue to call for greater safeguards, clearer proportionality limits, and independent review when enforcement actions risk permanent loss of property.
Some residents allege—and it is widely rumored within the community—that Winchester’s blight enforcement disproportionately targets debt-free properties because municipal liens can more easily convert into revenue, a claim the town has not formally acknowledged.
New Role in Town Government
Following her resignation as zoning agent, Pam Colombie has transitioned into a new position within the Town of Winchester as assistant collector of revenue. The newly appointed zoning agent is Geoff Green.
Town of Winchester Planning & Community Development: Official Website
Town Manager Paul Harrington requested additional information to be added on 8/15/2025 approx. around noon: (Confirmed on December 10th, 2025 – Read our report here)
- Pam Colombie resigned as Zoning Enforcement Officer more than two years ago to take a new role in town hall as Assistant Tax Collector.
- She has been serving as Assistant Tax Collector for the Town of Winchester for the two years.
More at Presence News here:
