|
Abstract Zone expropriation is one of the main policies for developing new towns, old cities, and rural communities in our country. The purpose of zone expropriation is to achieve the fundamental national policy of "land value increment belongs to the public", to solve the problem of land acquisition for public facilities, and to prevent land speculation. Zone expropriation also claims to allow land owners to share development benefits and to implement user charge in order to comply with the principle of social justice. This paper studies the zone expropriation of Shigang District, Jinhu Township as an example and investigates whether the policy objectives emphasized by the government and the people rights ensured are balanced. I will analyze it by comparing the difference based on the financial evaluation report conducted prior to the development and the financial results report after completion of the development, and conducting in-depth interviews with a few land owners. Also, from a management perspective, some previous methods might be worth for further investigation. Therefore, we will discuss from the perspective of equality, distribution, and finance in this study. The study result indicates that after the account-closing day, this development project has revenue of NTD 2,318,872,869 and there are still 7,964.79 square meters of building lands to be sold. The current earnings from the project is NTD 1,996,135,724, which has a great difference with the earning, NTD 35,115,000 estimated in the financial evaluation report conducted prior to the development. One of the reasons that caused such result is pubic tendering land price. Because of the market boom at the time, the price hit a record high. The highest price of each square meters in the residential areas was NTD 63,000, and the price of commercial areas broke through the amount of NTD 110,000. The prices were three to eight times higher than the tendering price, which was estimated in the financial evaluation report. The other reason is that the development cost for this project was over-estimated in the evaluation report. The actual outsourcing cost was only 60 percent of the estimated cost. With the combination of these two factors, the earnings of the development project soared by more than 70 times. As a result, the County government had a generous income while it caused a great loss to land owners. The result verifies the hypothesis of this study and the doubts from the land owners, and that the allocation of the compensation equivalent lands of zone expropriation was not reasonable. Hence, it should be reviewed again. There are multi-purposes for zone expropriation. The current situation in Kinmen is that government has taken over lots of lands and develops at a slow pace. Many lands were included in the project but had not been developed for more than 30 years due to manpower shortage, insufficient financial resources, poor design, or development cost ineffective, which seriously impact the land owners’ rights. I hereby suggest that Kinmen County Government should consider the necessity and public welfare when planning the development projects of zone expropriation, instead of making the decision on whether the project may be profitable. In the meantime, the governments should also take care of both fundamental rights of the land owner and their right of obtaining the ownership of public facilities. Keyword: zone expropriation, compensation equivalent land, Shigang section.
|