Jennemann won for a controversial article he wrote about how politically connected groups in Hoboken were influencing the process of how contractors were placed on the Board of Education's meeting agenda.
"I would just like to thank my publishers and editor-in-chief for taking the risk and having enough confidence in my skills to write such a politically charged and controversial story," Jennemann said last week, "even as the threat of lawsuits hung over the paper until moments before the story went to print."
Jennemann was tipped off by a confidential e-mail that was circulating among politically connected attorneys and the school board's business administrator last spring.
The e-mail was sent from Hoboken attorney Edward Florio, whose firm (Sarkisian, Florio & Kenny) handles workers' compensation cases for the school board. It was sent to the Board of Education's general counsel, Mark S. Tabenkin of the Lyndhurst-based firm Scarinci & Hollenbeck.
The e-mail stated, "The following are the items to be prepared for the reorganization meeting." The items included the names of three law firms and four other firms to be put on the school board's meeting agenda for no-bid contracts, as well as suggesting certain board members for the positions of board president, vice president and "governance committee chair." The e-mail implied that among those firms, both Florio's firm and the Scarinci firm's contracts should be on the agenda for renewal.
The e-mail implied that Mayor David Roberts knew it was being sent to the board attorneys. It was criticized by board members who were angry that it looked like City Hall was interfering in board business.
Despite the complexity of the story, Jennemann said the hardest part of writing it was convincing his sources that they could supply him with the e-mail. He finally got a hold of it late Thursday afternoon - a day before deadline - and started to write the story into the early morning hours. He stayed up all night to write it and missed the NJPA's awards ceremony last year to do so, even though he and other reporters in the newspaper chain were set to receive investigative reporting awards.
The next day, he walked into a web of discussions between the Reporter's lawyers and lawyers involved in the story, who argued that the e-mail was part of attorney/client privilege. The uncertainty of printing the story led to the creation of two papers - one with the story an one without - prepared by the graphics staff as a precaution. But at around 7 p.m. the Reporter's lawyers informed the paper's publishers that it was okay to go with the first story.
The Reporter's publishers, Lucha Malato and David Unger, and Editor-in-Chief Caren Lissner said they were pleased with Jennemann's award last week.
"Tom has been at the paper for three years and is always very concerned about the issues he is covering," Lissner said. "He has a strong sense of integrity and works very hard to interpret the very complex issues affecting Hoboken."
This is the third year in a row that reporters in the chain have won top newswriting awards. Jennemann himself and has won 10 awards in various state contests, including first place for the Society of Professional Journalists' annual awards for a 2002 series titled "How it Came to Be," which traced the progress of modern Hoboken. Jennemann said, "It feels good to win this award. The most important thing is that we were able to effectively report on a controversial issue that directly impacts the community which we cover."
The controversy over the contracts inspired the board to table them so that board members could review them. They were later approved.
Post a Comment