Taxicab drivers will have to pay less per car for liability insurance to operate within the city of Lincoln.

City Council decided Tuesday night to drop the existing amount of public liability insurance for taxicabs from $2 million to $1 million per year.

The change came after the Sept. 27, 2011 request by Arvinder Bains to reduce the $2 million public liability insurance requirement listed in the city’s municipal code, according to the city’s assistant director of development George Dellwo.

Bains addressed the council during the meeting, pointing out that San Francisco, Oakland and Daly City require a $1 million liability insurance policy.

“Why is a city that has zero taxis and that has had zero incidents asking for $2 million?” Bains questioned. “I’m trying to work with the city to generate jobs and bring tax dollars into Lincoln.”

Triple AAA Green Cab Company owner Bains, a Lincoln resident who operates his business out of Roseville, would like to provide taxicab service to Lincoln.

“I can work with it right now. That’s 50 percent off,” said Bains regarding council’s decision to require a $1 million insurance policy Tuesday night. “If everything goes smoothly, I definitely will run my business here.”

Bains told The News Messenger earlier Tuesday that the $2 million liability insurance would cost $6,500 per year per taxicab to operate in Lincoln, which he “could not afford.”

With the $1 million policy, the price to insure each car would be $5,000 per year, according to Dellwo.

City Council also directed city staff to “work with the police department to identify those requirements in the ordinance that can be eliminated” for the inspection of taxicabs, according to City Councilman Tom Cosgrove.

The police department is currently required to inspect taxicabs for safety, according to city attorney Jon Hobbs.

“What you could do is make that a discretionary check, which limits the city’s liability a little bit,” Hobbs said. “Sometimes the vehicle may not need to be checked, but if the police department feels they need to check it, they can do that.”

In other news, the city addressed what Mayor Spencer Short called “some fairly significant inconsistencies” in the Jan. 19 fiscal sustainability committee column (“The truth and nothing but the truth- what about our park,” page A8).

The column, written by committee member Michele Hutchinson, discussed what happened to the money collected for Lincoln Crossing parks.

Prior to the city addressing the column, Lincoln resident Terrie Robinson also addressed the column during public comments.

“I appreciated the column and definitely had a lot of questions and concerns of funds raised through Mello Roos used for projects outside of Lincoln Crossing,” Robinson said. “I would really like to ask them, given how this issue about parks money is an ongoing one, if they don’t do anything else, I would like them to come to Lincoln Crossing with diagrams, numbers and legal justifications for moving the money around.”

In the fiscal sustainability committee (FSC) column, Short said, “there are fundamental inaccuracies dealing with the amount collected, how it was collected and what accounts were used” for Lincoln Crossing parks.

The column reported that $9,445,000 had been collected for parks and $6,444,559 had been spent.

On Wednesday, Short said that park fees collected totaled $5.2 million and $5.12 million in park fees had been spent.

The column also said that $3 million in parks fees had been transferred to another city fund.

“The $3 million figure in there that was said to be moved to another fund did not happen,” City Manager Jim Estep said Tuesday night.

If residents “have questions of legality,” Short added, “they can go to City Hall” to look at the bond documents.

“Our commitment is to try to build those parks as we are able to build more funds,” Short said. “This is not a Lincoln Crossing specific issue. This is a city-wide issue.”

The News Messenger asked Robinson on Wednesday morning about Short’s comments on the column.

“I found it disappointing, but assuming he runs for reelection, he’ll have the opportunity to provide a more respectful and comprehensive explanation to the people of Lincoln Crossing,” Robinson said. “It was dismissive and the very fact that there’s a clarification required of what was reported by the FSC means that it has not been covered as clearly as he says.”