The Taipei City Government is currently facing significant public pressure. Beyond the controversy surrounding the selection of Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s eldest son, Chiang De-li, for an "Academic Year 115 International Exchange Student" subsidy—which has raised questions regarding conflict of interest and fairness—the city government has also been exposed by media reports for systemic failures in the management of cultural asset preservation and restoration project subsidies. Regarding the study abroad subsidy controversy, Chiang Wan-an officially announced on September 2 that he would decline the funding. Meanwhile, investigative reports indicate that the Taipei City Department of Cultural Affairs has exhibited flaws in its historic building restoration programs, characterized by a focus on funding over supervision, which has led to contractors using substandard materials and even risks of abandoned projects, prompting widespread scrutiny of the city government's administrative execution.

According to various media reports, the selection process for Chiang De-li’s exchange student subsidy, which consisted only of a document review and an English interview without a written examination, has been criticized for a lack of transparency, with allegations that the Department of Education failed to implement conflict of interest avoidance principles. Addressing this controversy, former legislator Kuo Cheng-liang noted in a program commentary that the core of the issue lies in public perception rather than purely legal matters, as public opinion has linked the "privilege" label to city government decision-making, resulting in political fallout.

Furthermore, regarding cultural assets, media investigations discovered that several historic sites, including the "Former Nan-Cai-Yuan Japanese-style Dormitory Complex," suffered from poor construction quality by contractors and failed supervision mechanisms during the city-funded restoration process, leading to a significant gap between the intended results of cultural asset preservation and the actual outcomes.

Currently, public attention regarding Chiang De-li’s subsidy is primarily focused on the fairness of the selection process and Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s responsibility to avoid conflicts of interest. Although Chiang Wan-an has announced he will decline the subsidy in an attempt to mitigate the situation, the Department of Education has yet to provide a concrete procedural review report addressing whether the selection process was influenced by the "Mayor's status." Regarding cultural asset restoration, it remains to be seen whether the "three-part subsidy" pattern alleged by the media—heavy funding, light supervision, and victimized property owners—is a long-term systemic issue within the Taipei City Government, pending clarification from the Department of Cultural Affairs regarding acceptance records and disbursement processes for individual cases.

Based on current information, specific evidence regarding contractors using substandard materials and the attribution of legal liability remain subject to confirmation by subsequent judicial or administrative investigations.

These controversies have had a direct impact on the administrative credibility of the Taipei City Government. In terms of education policy, citizens have become more sensitive to the fairness of resource allocation, and future review mechanisms for city subsidy programs may face stricter public scrutiny. Regarding cultural policy, while the city government has long viewed cultural asset preservation as a highlight of its administrative achievements, the frequent reports of poor restoration quality not only affect the preservation value of historic buildings but may also lead to intense oversight by the city council regarding the budgeting and execution of cultural asset funds, thereby affecting the efficiency of future policy implementation and budget deliberations.

Divergent views suggest that the selection of Chiang De-li for the subsidy should not be over-interpreted as mere "privilege," with some commentators arguing that the focus should be on the design flaws of the current exchange student selection system rather than targeting an individual. However, public opinion generally holds that as family members of public figures, individuals should maintain higher moral standards and conflict-of-interest avoidance when participating in city-funded programs. Regarding cultural asset restoration, there are calls for the city government to move beyond simply providing funds and to establish comprehensive project supervision and acceptance assessment mechanisms to prevent damage to historic buildings caused by administrative negligence.

Future observation will focus on whether the Taipei City Government will reform the exchange student selection system to appease public concerns regarding fairness. Simultaneously, whether the Department of Cultural Affairs will launch a special investigation into the cultural asset restoration project flaws exposed by the media and take legal action against the relevant contractors will be a key test of whether the Chiang administration possesses "systemic governance" capabilities. Additionally, as global public policy and political risk issues increase due to rising crime rates and political instability in regions such as South America, how the Taipei City Government maintains administrative stability amidst domestic controversies remains an indicator to watch.