運動中心委外招商模式研究-臺北市運動中心為例

Abstract

為打造臺北市成為健康的國際城市及提升市民健康體能，臺北市政府計畫於各行政區設置運動中心，第1座中山運動中心自2003年開始營運，至2010年文山運動中心加入營運後，共計12座運動中心投入運動市場，早期係採用「臺北市委託經營管理自治條例」委託營運廠商經營，2008年後採用「促進民間參與公共建設法」營運-移轉(OT)模式，後原採自治條例委外運動中心契約期限屆滿，因臺北市議會要求改採用促參法整建-營運-移轉(ROT)模式委外。目前3種委外招商模式併行，就行政機關之立場其經營期限及權利金收入有所不同。 本研究將針對運動中心委外招商模式，搜集相關實務案例加以彙整分析，藉由案例之呈現，探討委外招商模式之優劣，並將分析資料作為日後招商之參考資料。

To build Taipei a healthy global city, and to improve the physical fitness of the citizens, the Taipei City Government planned to establish sport centers in every district of the city. Since the first sport center, Zhong Shan Sport Center, opened in 2003, until 2010, when Wen Shan Sport Center entered into service, there had been 12 sport centers joined the sport industry. In the early stage, the city government adopted the “Self-Governance Articles for Outsourcing Management of Taipei City Property”, and contracted the sport centers to outsourcing firms. Then in 2008, the “Act for Promotion of Private Participation in Infrastructure Projects (APPIP)” was applied, and the sport centers were managed through the operate-transfer (OT) model. When the contracts of those firms adapting the self-governance articles had expired, in response to the Taipei City Council, the government then adopted the rehabilitate-operate-transfer (ROT) model of the APPIP to manage the sport centers. Thus, currently there are three approaches applied as outsourcing management models. From the administrative organization’s point of view, the terms of contract and the entitlements of the three models are different from one another. Through the analysis of the collected cases of the outsourcing management model of sport centers, this study will examine the pros and cons of the outsourcing management model. The research results can be used as reference during the future outsourcing process.