Chancellor Mark Nordenberg: You’ve got a problem.

Things have been going pretty well up… Chancellor Mark Nordenberg: You’ve got a problem.

Things have been going pretty well up until now. Under your very capable direction, Pitt has upped its applications and its average SAT scores, significantly increased enrollment, beautified its buildings and grounds, and greatly improved its sports teams.

And all of that spells good news for any university. Pitt is earning a certain prestige that it definitely lacked 10 years ago, and many would argue that you’re the man to thank.

So thank you: Because of your leadership, my diploma will continue to become more valuable even after I graduate, and as the improvements continue.

But with the good comes the bad, and you’re also the man who must take the blame when it’s due. Like when the Princeton Review ranks Pitt 11th worst for racial interaction. Or when tuition increases during my college career here have averaged 9 percent yearly – almost three times the rate of inflation. Or when both of the major newspapers serving the Pittsburgh area criticize you in print for receiving a pay raise that amounts to an extra $122,500 yearly in your already well-lined pocket.

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, a paper that leans just slightly right of staunchly conservative, wrote in its Dec. 26 editorial, “We’re certainly not members of the class-envy crowd … but even we think [Nordenberg’s] new pay package is a bit much.”

And most people are saying the same thing. Students wonder at the fact that your pay increase – not counting the $75,000-per-year bonus just for sticking around – is the same 14 percent as last year’s tuition increase. Staff members wonder how the University can cut several jobs in the name of saving money, and then award the chancellor and five top-level administrators a salary increase that approaches a combined half-million dollars per year in spending increases.

And outsiders – Pittsburgh residents who have never even stepped foot on Pitt’s campus, but have read one of these newspapers – wonder how their children will ever be able to afford college in an academic setting which is increasingly focused on wealth over knowledge. If the tuition continues to grow as it has since I arrived here, students can expect to pay upwards of $20,000 per year, plus room and board, before a dozen years have passed.

So Chancellor Nordenberg: You’ve got a real problem on your hands. In a University community that already lacked any sense of unity, you’ve now succeeded in disenfranchising and enraging both your students (your customers) and your staff (your employees). Almost anyone could tell you that amounts to bad business.

But I don’t want to see the University suffer from bad business practices any more than you do, so I’m ready to look beyond these transgressions of the past. And I’m ready to propose a plan for the future. It’s up to you and me, chancellor. We can form a partnership for progress.

My proposal

Chancellor Nordenberg: You and I are in far different financial situations. Your yearly salary for your impressive work at Pitt is about $465,000, plus benefits and perks such as the use of a beautiful home between North Oakland and Shadyside. Rumor has it that you work a great deal – sometimes upwards of 10 hours a day. And I’m sure that with three children – two of whom are college-age – you’re no stranger to paying bills. Still, though, it seems like you might have at least a little extra spending money.

I, on the other hand, am compensated just under $8,000 for my one year as editor in chief, though the only perk that accompanies this job is my own office. My job is also demanding – I work until almost midnight each day – but because the newspaper does not provide a home for me, I pay for housing, food, and tuition by myself.

Nonetheless, I realize the importance of education for all people, and I’m ready to put my money where my mouth is – but only if you are.

Chancellor Nordenberg, I respectfully request that you return your salary increase to the students at the University of Pittsburgh. A modest donation would be the 14 percent increase – or $47,500 – that was recently tacked onto your salary. A more generous donation would include the $75,000 bonus, increasing the value of the donation to $122,500, or 26 percent of your new salary.

And I will match your donation, percent for percent. If you donate 14 percent of your salary, I will take a 14 percent pay cut in order to make my own donation. In fact, should you decided that, with minimal living expenses, you are able to donate your entire yearly salary to endow something truly great, I will continue to work as editor in chief for no pay at all.

You and I could get together to discuss what great things our money could do for the students here. My personal preference would be to endow a scholarship, though I’m open to other suggestions.

And maybe we could get other students and administrators in on this. It could be a united student-administrator initiative, with both sides finally striving for the same common goal: improving education through generosity and dedication to Pitt.

Or, maybe you’ll just ignore this silly proposition and move forward, eventually learning to enjoy the comfortable life of the out-of-touch upper class.

Dave Hartman is the editor in chief of The Pitt News, and if he received a 14 percent salary increase he could buy one additional textbook.