Consultations and engagement

We consulted on our proposal to introduce a new, optional-to-pay ‘care arrangement fee’ to cover the council’s administration costs when arranging care for people that:

1. Have savings and/or assets above £23,250.00 and,
2. ask Leicester City Council to arrange their home-based care for them.

We asked people that could be affected by this change how paying the care arrangement fee would affect them and provided an opportunity to share feedback on this proposal.

We received a total 75 responses on our proposal, with an additional 17 calls and/or emails made to the consulting team.

Nearly half of respondents (45%) shared that they would be able to manage paying the care arrangement fee if they were asked to.

18% of respondents shared that paying the fee would affect them a little – limiting money for extras or treats.

Additional feedback, when provided by respondents, focused on concerns with affording to pay the fee, and the value/ preference of paying the fee on an ongoing, annual basis (originally proposed).

All feedback shared by respondents via survey, email, and telephone call have been considered – with the proposal and findings from our consultation exercise scrutinised by the City Mayor, his Executive Team, and the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission.

We will progress with implementing the care arrangement fee, and this will be introduced from April 2026 at £165.47.

We have carefully considered feedback shared on the affordability and value of paying this fee. The fee amount will still be optional to pay and will now only apply at the point when a person that pays the full cost of their care asks the council to arrange it for them – this is instead of an annual fee.

We feel as though this change addresses the concerns raised in this exercise. 

We recognise that people may not wish to pay the fee. To support people to make informed decisions about arranging their care, new information, advice, and guidance will also be made available. 

Thank you for sharing your views on this proposal. 

We consulted on our proposal to extend existing Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO) for three elements of dog control in the city:

1. Dog fouling
2. Dogs on leads
3. Dog exclusion areas

We asked the public and stakeholders if they had any objections to the proposal and provided an opportunity to leave feedback.

336 responses were submitted. Nearly 99% of respondents were members of the public.

In summary, the responses were highly in support of extending all three PSPOs, as follows:

1. Dog fouling - 93% in favour
2. Dogs on leads - 84% in favour
3. Dog exclusion areas - 84% in favour

Additional supportive stakeholder feedback was also received outside of this online process.

All comments have been scrutinised and noted.

The evidence from reports and complaints to our customer services team, and enforcement action taken since the PSPO orders were introduced is in support of them being extended.

We now intend to seek approval from the city mayor to extend the PSPO orders for a further three years. Subject to this approval, notices will be posted in November 2025 confirming reintroduction, and we will publish the renewed orders on our website.

Leicester City Council have identified that improvements are needed to the pavements of Melton Road, between Loughborough Road and Checketts Road, and have commenced a long term, multiyear footway maintenance works programme to be carried out over 7 phases. 

The aim of the works is to improve the condition of the pavement, make the relevant sections more pedestrian-friendly, safe to use and tackle significant footway drainage problems. 

We consulted on proposals to remove five street trees on Melton Road as part of footway improvement works. The trees were identified because their roots had caused severe damage to pavements, creating trip hazards, ponding, and accessibility issues. Notices were placed on the trees, on nearby streets, and online between 26 March and 30 June 2025. People could respond via the consultation website or by email. 

We received 86 responses (82 online, 4 by email). The majority of responses (69) opposed tree removal. The main reasons were: 

• · The importance of trees for climate, shade, air quality and local character (37) 

• · Suggestions of alternative solutions such as flexible asphalt or building up the pavement (14) 

• · Disagreement with the Council’s stated reasons for felling (6) 

• · Other reasons, including references to religion and comparisons with other towns and cities (7) 

A small number of respondents supported removal (4), raised queries about replacement planting (3), or gave unrelated comments (6). 

In response to feedback, we carried out further trial excavations around the five trees to see if alternative engineering solutions could allow them to remain. As a result, we will retain three trees by making changes to pavement design and using measures like resin surfacing and street furniture to guide pedestrians safely. However, two trees (outside 161 Melton Road and 197 Melton Road) must still be removed because their roots prevent drainage solutions and create serious safety hazards. To compensate, we will plant six new trees elsewhere in the ward, meaning more trees overall in the long term.