我國區里治理網絡關係探討-以臺北市松山區基層建議案為例

Abstract

本研究以臺北市松山區公所自民國96年至105年，共計241件提案內容進行分析，運用網絡治理的研究架構，以提案制度運作中區公所、市政府一級局處、里辦公處、市議員及立法委員之間的互動關係為主，分別一方面探討區公所在地方基層的制度定位、功能與未來面臨的轉型挑戰；另一方面透過深度訪談的資料蒐集，進一步分析區公所在地經營的區里關係，在實務運作上面臨到的治理危機問題。 研究方法採與本研究最相關的11部研究論文資料，將過去研究論點與重要的結果進行整理，結合本文基層提案研究內容，據以設計問卷的內容架構，分為組織結構與職掌、區政關係經營、專案會議式管理、區政溝通、區域特性營造與地方需求回應性7大面向，計有18題的題目。深入訪談區公所基層里幹事、課員、課長與里長，以其多年的地方行政與政治經驗，觀察基層提案運作10年以來，顯示出區公所在地經營所面臨到的政治與行政兩種價值競逐的困境，藉由提案制度互動網絡的關係與反映出區公所地方治理失能的情形，進而反觀區公所本身的制度、結構與職掌問題，從而提出十點改進區公所職能的建議: 一、建構區級服務型政府，賦予區公所實質的職權，並提升區公所在市政府的組織定位。 二、區公所行政績效評核的基準應回歸客觀評量基準，不應以里長滿意度問卷上逕為評估，容易失準且造成機關俘虜問題。 三、賦予區公所更大的人事權、預算權與參與法令規章制定權的相關職權。 四、重新檢視市政府各局處委辦業務的性質，應採權責相符的制度設計，避免推諉職權又變相成為區政考評的扭曲現象。 五、提升區公所組織員額的職等編制，避免區公所矮化而無法發揮實質統御的權力。 六、因應各區公所的區里特性，賦予各區公所經營發展的規劃資源，簡化工作程序並編派合理人力與工作負荷量。 七、民選里長的行政監督職權，應有更明確的法令規章，避免區里無效管理的現象。 八、市政過度極權下忽略由下而上的行政與政治溝通，應強化區公所與里辦公處之機的聯繫，以及正式由下而上的市政建議權，避免行政五段與民意落差的現象。 九、建立有效的市政各局處與區公所的橫向溝通平台，且課責各市政單位應負起相對的職責，統一相關作業規範與流程，避免相互推諉與行政怠惰問題。 十、因應地方民主轉與市民參與管道的開放，營造公民社會應賦予區公所更大的職能，並隨著民主開放的過程，調整區公所的角色與組織結構，發展具各區特色的民主環境，提升具民意基礎的決策正當性。

The study is based on the 241 suggestion programs in SongShan District during 2007 to 2016. And combined the analysis framework of Network Governance to observe those important participants : the District, the Sub-district, the Competent Authority in Taipei City Government and the Councilors in Taipei City Council. By in-depth interviewing 12 interviewees, including the sub-district secretaries, section assistants, section chief, inspector, the sub-district chiefs. The interview outline focus on those topics: the institutional problems, the relationship between District and Sub-district, the Project meeting of suggestion programs, political communication, regional characteristic development, the responsiveness of local needs. The observation of the District institutional problems and the disability network governance, this study concludes 10 proposals to improve SongShan District authority: First, to construct the district-level service-oriented government and empower the district office substantial powers, enhance the state of District. Second, the administrative district office performance assessment benchmark should return to an objective assessment benchmarks, not the satisfaction questionnaire assessed easily by the sub-district chiefs. Third, the personnel assigned to the district office greater authority, the budget authority and the right to participate in the development of laws and regulations related to the terms of reference. Fourth, re-examine the nature of municipal government departments commissioned at the business, it should be consistent with the accrual system design, to avoid buck-passing zone mandate has somehow become the political evaluation of distortions. Fifth, to enhance the level and the preparation of the district office organized post, to avoid the district office dwarf can not play the power of governing substance. Sixth, the response characteristics of each district, giving each district office resource planning business development, simplification of work procedures and programmed to send a reasonable amount of manpower and workload. Seventh, the supervision authority, laws and regulations of sub-district chiefs should be clearer, avoid ineffective management zone phenomenon. Eighth, the centralized city government ignored the bottom-up political communication. The district office should be strengthened the relationship with sub-district and should not be arbitrary. Ninth, the establishment of effective horizontal communication platform with the Competent Authority in Taipei City Government, uniformity between power and responsibility, unity the standard operation procedure, and to avoid administrative inaction and buck-passing problem. Tenth, in response to local democracy and citizen participation, creating a civil society should be given a larger district office functions, and with the democratic and open process, adjusting the organizational structure and the role of the district office.