Print

Some timely questions about Pitt's spending

Written by Rosa Colucci on .

As a graduate of the University of Pittsburgh, I was, to say the least, shocked at the financial data recently released on the university's Internal Revenue Service Form 990. Under the state's right-to-know law, Pennsylvania's four state-related universities must release to the state and post on the universities' Web site this form and a list of its 25 highest-salaried employees. Among other things, Pitt's form reveals that the annual compensation for the men's basketball coach was $937,600.

I don't take issue with this, but I do strongly object to the fact that our wonderful and talented and successful women's basketball coach, Agnus Berenato, is paid one-third of the amount paid to men's coach Jamie Dixon. This is intolerable and should be addressed as soon as possible!

Other expenditures that rankle me are the compensation paid to Pitt attorneys and investment advisers. It is not the amount -- the attorneys were paid $5,031,302 and two investment advisers were paid a total of $1,967,601 -- but the attorneys' home office is in Philadelphia and the investment firms are based in Boston, Mass., and London, England. It is difficult for me to understand why Pitt could not support local firms to handle these assignments. We certainly have an abundance of well-qualified firms in Pittsburgh.

JOHN T. BRADY
Oakmont

 

Join the conversation:

To report inappropriate comments, abuse and/or repeat offenders, please send an email to socialmedia@post-gazette.com and include a link to the article and a copy of the comment. Your report will be reviewed in a timely manner. Thank you.