On Tuesday, March 11, the University of Pittsburgh’s Student Government Board held its annual election for president, vice president, board member positions and referendums. The H2PinskyBudike ticket won president and vice president, and seven board member positions were filled. Notably, however, the four referendum questions passed and were approved by the Pitt student body.
The 2025 SGB election referendum questions were as follows — “Do you want the University of Pittsburgh to commit to phasing out single-use plastics?”, “Should the Student Code of Conduct be amended to ensure that, at all Hearings, one or more students serve as additional Hearing Officers or as members of a Hearing Board?”, “Should the University of Pittsburgh disclose the contents of its investment portfolio and undergo a yearly, public auditing process to ensure that University operations are transparent and accountable?” and “Should the University of Pittsburgh divest all financial holdings, if any, from weapons manufacturers arming Israel?”
The passing of these referendums does not guarantee a future Pitt with these policies. Merely, the passing of these referendums shows university administration what the students want. Pitt administration should listen and comply with the will of its student body.
The 2025 election had record turnout with a 400-500% increase in participation. The passing of the referendum is not a fluke nor do the sentiments represent a miniscule portion of Pitt’s undergrad population. People showed up for this election for a reason. While we cannot say it was due to the referendum questions, which Students for Justice in Palestine fought hard to get on the 2025 ticket, the theory is not implausible either. Something about the 2025 SGB election prompted more students than in the last three years to turn out to vote. This speaks volumes — Pitt students care that the outcome is followed through on.
It is the university students who pay exorbitant amounts of money to be here and learn from Pitt faculty. Students deserve a seat at the table and a role in the policy-making decisions of administration officials. Ignoring the voice of students undermines the very principles of shared governance and accountability that all universities should uphold, and it undermines the student government institution in its entirety by not taking the student body’s whims seriously. If Pitt truly values its students as stakeholders — which it should — it must recognize that our demands and voting decisions are not just symbolic. The outcome of these referendum questions reflects a real concern about ethics and transparency held by the majority of voting students on campus. Pitt has a duty to respond to these concerns legitimately.
Dismissing student input after record-breaking engagement sets a dangerous precedent, signaling that student voices only matter when convenient. Pitt administration has the choice to honor its students’ collective will and decision or risk alienating the very people who fill the halls of this institution. Pitt administration must consider and listen to the Pitt electorate and abide by the election outcomes resulting from the 2025 election.
The Pitt News editorial is a weekly article written by the opinions editors in collaboration with all other desk editors. It reflects the collective opinion of the current Pitt News editorial staff.