ALFREDO CABADA
1. Alfredo, if you were elected, would you support a series of roundtable discussions with Government, Council, property owners and small businesses to explore how a partnership city-wide business improvement district could benefit the city business sector? What would your first step be?
Absolutely. I would not only support roundtable discussions, I would help lead them. Collaboration is essential if we want a vibrant, thriving city. Businesses, landlords, and the Council must sit at the same table with shared purpose and accountability.
My first step would be to initiate a listening forum with the Adelaide Business Collective, key landlords, precinct groups, and SMEs to identify the most pressing barriers to growth, from red tape to street activation to cleaning and safety. This would help shape a clear action plan and form the basis of any future BID framework. From there, we can bring in State Government partners to explore funding, legislative support, and coordination.
2. Alfredo, what would you propose to harness the collective strength of businesses and property owners in partnership with Council? How would you build support from the retail, hospitality and professional services sectors in unique areas and mainstreets in the city?
We need a culture shift in the way Council engages with business. Rather than acting as a gatekeeper, it should be a partner and enabler. I would propose the establishment of precinct-specific advisory groups made up of traders, landlords and council officers, focused on quick wins and long-term precinct planning, including events, activations, place-making and better service delivery.
To build buy-in across sectors, we need a shared vision and consistent communication. That means tailored messaging for different precincts (from Hutt to Hindley), data-driven reporting on what’s working, and incentives for collaboration. Many businesses feel disconnected from Council, it’s time to change that with genuine outreach and measurable outcomes.
3. Alfredo, how do you envision a city-wide business improvement district could complement existing council initiatives in the business/economic development space?
A well-designed city-wide BID could fill the gaps Council cannot, with more agility, more targeted funding, and more consistent engagement across sectors. While the Council can create frameworks and deliver core services, a BID brings energy and ownership from the business community itself.
It could act as a catalyst for enhancing Council initiatives, such as marketing campaigns, clean and safe programs, and economic development strategies, by channeling private-sector expertise and additional investment into targeted improvements. Think: cleaner streets, better lighting, coordinated trading hours, smarter waste management, and more curated activations.
A BID done well is not another layer of bureaucracy, it’s a platform for collective impact. And if elected, I will champion it with energy, clarity, and a clear understanding of what success looks like for business owners and property investors alike.
ANNE MORAN
1. Anne, if you were elected, would you support a series of roundtable discussions with Government, Council, property owners and small businesses to explore how a partnership city-wide business improvement district could benefit the city business sector? What would your first step be?
I would definitely support this initiative and my first step would be to convince the other councillors to support it.
2. Anne, what would you propose to harness the collective strength of businesses and property owners in partnership with Council? How would you build support from the retail, hospitality and professional services sectors in unique areas and mainstreets in the city?
I would strive to make sure that there is a broad participation from all groups. To build support the council should visit businesses and property owners face to face and convince them to be part of this initiative.
3. Anne, how do you envision a city-wide business improvement district could complement existing council initiatives in the business/economic development space?
It should focus the efforts to help businesses and not conflict with current initiatives.
BEN AYRIS
1. Ben, If you were elected, would you support a series of roundtable discussions with Government, Council, property owners and small businesses to explore how a partnership city-wide Business Improvement District could benefit the city business sector? What would your first step be?
Absolutely. I would strongly support a series of structured roundtable discussions. Small businesses are the lifeblood of Adelaide’s economy, and their future depends on stronger partnerships with local government and property stakeholders. A city-wide Business Improvement District (BID) model could be a powerful tool to revitalise our retail strips, increase foot traffic, and support local jobs—if developed inclusively and with broad support.
My first step would be to initiate a facilitated listening session with representatives from each sector—small business, property owners, council officers, and government departments—focusing on shared challenges and opportunities. It’s essential we begin by identifying common goals before discussing funding models or structure. From there, we could establish a working group to scope out what a BID could look like for Adelaide, tailored to our city’s unique city grid layout and business mix.
2. Ben, What would you propose to harness the collective strength of businesses and property owners in partnership with Council? How would you build support from the retail, hospitality and professional services sectors in unique areas and main streets in the city?
To harness that collective strength, we need to provide a platform for business voices to be heard and acted upon—beyond one-off consultations. I would propose creating a precinct-based Business Leadership Network made up of local champions from retail, hospitality, and professional services, supported by Council. This would allow tailored strategies for each area—Gouger Street has different needs than Rundle Mall or the East End.
Support starts with listening, but it’s sustained through visible action. I would prioritise small, quick wins—like improved wayfinding, better lighting, and activation grants for local traders—that demonstrate the value of collaboration. I’d also push for clearer communication channels between Council and business communities, so they’re not left navigating red tape alone. Where appropriate, Council can co-invest in initiatives that boost trade and vibrancy, sending a clear signal that this is a true partnership.
3. Ben, How do you envision a city-wide Business Improvement District could complement existing Council initiatives in the business/economic development space?
A well-designed BID should amplify Council’s existing economic development work—not duplicate it. By unlocking a dedicated, locally managed funding stream for business-led initiatives, a BID can drive targeted promotions, local beautification, events, and place branding in ways that Council alone often can’t due to budget or mandate limitations.
It could also enable Council to shift from trying to deliver everything in-house, to becoming an enabler and partner—supporting precincts to take ownership of their growth and identity. Importantly, a BID would also bring stronger data collection and performance tracking into the mix, allowing Council and businesses alike to make better-informed decisions about where to invest and how to measure success.
Done right, a BID would act as connective tissue between Council strategy, local business insight, and economic opportunity—and I would work to ensure its design reflects Adelaide’s diverse business landscape.
DAVID ELLIOTT
1. David, If you were elected, would you support a series of roundtable discussions with Govt, Council, property owners and small businesses to explore how a partnership city-wide business improvement district could benefit the city business sector? What would your first step be?
Yes, Council has facilitated a broad range of roundtables to address sector-specific and cross-sectional issues and many have led to helpful action plans and strategies. Importantly it has been helpful at bolstering sensible approaches, rather than allowing fringe dogmatic views of councillors to drive policy. My first step would be to make a request to the Lord Mayor and CEO to hold the roundtable for the development of an action plan, with the involvement of AEDA. Collaborating with the business community about their needs doesn’t need to be a decision of Council or made into a political debate; its core business. Once an action plan is in place, Council should seek to resource the action plan.
2. David, What would you propose to harness the collective strength of businesses and property owners in partnership with Council. How would you build support from the retail, hospitality and professional services sectors in unique areas and mainstreets in the city?
The existing precinct-based groups and traders associations are very different from one another, some with just businesses, and some with residents and businesses. I would suggest that these unique groups would need to be individually consulted on their desire for a BID mechanism for their area, but that all such groups and interested businesses should be involved with any roundtables as above. It is likely that different precincts would move at different paces and it would be prudent for Council to accommodate that in any action plan. A trial program for one or two mainstreet areas could be a really good way to test different approaches over a couple of years to ensure a model that works for each area, and also ensure Council can appropriately budget and allocate resources to support the trials and any later implementation. A trial can demonstrate to others the effiicacy of a BID, or also demonstrate how it can be adapted to each precincts needs.
3. How do you envision a city-wide business improvement district could complement existing council initiatives in the business/economic development space?
The BID model is very similar to what already occurs for Rundle Mall and has demonstrated great success in developing a distinct identity for the precinct. Some precinct coordination groups already consult regularly with Council to raise issues eg infrastructure repair, beautification, social issues, with regular “audits” by the groups used by Council to quickly fix small issues, and make plans to address bigger ones – so there is a degree of consistency with how Council wants to support business precincts already. A BID model for other parts of the city could be helpful in establishing and enhancing distinct precinct identities and ensure that there is a mechanism for directly funding regular improvements and initiatives in that precinct. While the Rundle Mall Levy is used for marketing the Mall only, other parts of the city still benefit from it as people move beyond the Mall, and we see this in the Market precinct also with direction from the Adelaide Central Market Authority. Other localised, formalised precincts with improvement funding mechanisms seems to me quite consistent with these existing structures.
CARMEL NOON
- Carmel, If you were elected, would you support a series of roundtable discussions with Government, Council, property owners and small businesses to explore how a partnership city-wide Business Improvement District would benefit the city business sector? What would your first step be?
Absolutely—and not only do I support this initiative, I’ve been championing it for the past 2.5 years as a Councillor.
One of my very first meetings in this role was with David West from the Adelaide Business Collective (ABC) and Andrew Wallace from Adelaide University, where I became intrigued in the concept of Business Improvement Districts (BIDs). Since that time, I’ve raised the idea a few times when discussing how Council may diversify its revenue base beyond rate increases. Most recently at a 2025/26 Budget Workshop when – proposing BID or hybrid levy models—and this was received with ‘blank looks’ and early efforts were met with limited enthusiasm.
A standout moment for me was attending an ABC-hosted event featuring Jace Tyrrell, inaugural CEO of the Sydney Harbour Waterfront BID and former head of London’s West End BID. His presentation—highlighting the potential of public-private partnerships and collective investment—was incredibly compelling and further strengthened my resolve to pursue a model uniquely suited to Adelaide.
Importantly, I recognise that what works for Adelaide may not be the “stock standard” BID structure. We already have a local precedent in the Rundle Mall traders levy, and I see real potential in developing a hybrid model that blends BID principles with targeted levies across key precincts. A one-size-fits-all approach isn’t practical – some areas may benefit more directly than others, so a tiered or differentiated fee structure could be a fairer way forward. This model can be tailored to our city’s unique governance, scale and business ecosystem, ensuring the City of Adelaide Precincts/Mainstreets thrive with the support they deserve.
Through the recent budget process on looking at other revenue there is now renewed interest around the Council table, which is encouraging. However, I believe this must be pursued by a fully restored and functioning Council.
If re-elected, my first step would be:
a. Requesting a review of outcomes from any previous forums, consultations, or research on BIDs, levies or partnership models—both locally, interstate and internationally. This would include a detailed review of the existing Rundle Mall Traders Levy—not just the structure, but direct feedback from traders on what’s working, where they see improvements, and what lessons can be applied more broadly. Understanding what has already been explored—and what is and isn’t working—will provide a strong evidence base for next steps.
b. Initiating a formal roundtable series, co-hosted by Council, bringing together:
- State Government representatives including; Premier & Cabinet, Treasury, Office for Small and Family Business
- Business SA and the Small Business Commissioner
- Adelaide Business Collective
- Small business owners, commercial property owners
- Existing precinct and mainstreet groups
- Council placemakers and city activation teams
Collaboration must be central from the outset, ensuring these conversations reflect both policy and grassroots business perspectives. Stakeholders like Business SA, the Small Business Commissioner, and the Office for Small and Family Business can also provide valuable input into the governance framework, funding transparency, and legislative settings needed to support a hybrid levy model – and help build the state-level backing required for long-term success, including matched funding or policy alignment.
c. Adopting proven strategies used in other cities to engage business communities and assess interest, such as:
- One-on-one precinct walks and business listening tours
- Business sentiment surveys and online engagement tools
- Forums or breakfast events showcasing successful BIDs (as ABC has done previously)
- Precinct-specific pilot projects (e.g. collective marketing or amenity improvements)
- Showcasing local, interstate and international case studies to demonstrate tangible outcomes
- Exploring non-binding ballots or EOIs before formalising any levy proposal
These are the kinds of steps taken in Melbourne, Perth, Auckland, London, and Vancouver, where BID models have been successfully introduced through local ownership, fairness, transparency, and clearly demonstrated value.
- Focusing on a pilot to test and refine the model – Before introducing any city-wide approach, I would advocate for a targeted precinct pilot- potentially in an area like the Grote Street Business Precinct, East End Traders, and or Hutt Street – to co-design and trial a hybrid funding model with willing business and property stakeholders. This pilot would:
- Establish clear funding governance structure with local input
- Define and publicly report on measurable outcomes (e.g. foot traffic, amenity upgrades, safety perceptions)
- Include options for modest levy contributions, in-kind support, and State co-investment
- Collaborate with social service providers to embed community wellbeing goals (e.g. homelessness response or outreach)
A successful pilot would not only demonstrate value – it would build trust, highlight potential risks or barriers, and offer a proof of concept that could be refined and scaled to other precincts with strong local support.
2. Carmel, What would you propose to harness the collective strength of businesses and property owners in partnership with Council? How would you build support from the retail, hospitality and professional services sectors in unique areas and mainstreets in the city?
The City of Adelaide already has a valuable asset in its Authority being the Adelaide Economic Development Agency (AEDA). The next step is to fully engage AEDA in leading a structured dialogue with precinct stakeholders—including small businesses, landlords, and professional associations—to explore how a BID or hybrid model could be rolled out in a locally relevant way.
A business partnership model would give traders and landlords real ownership of their precinct’s future. It would enable coordinated investment in marketing, safety, activations, and services that go above and beyond what Council or AEDA can currently provide. It also helps take the pressure off precinct volunteer groups, many of which are currently under-resourced but full of potential.
The Rundle Mall traders levy provides a practical precedent for how this could work. With refinement, this model could be extended—not as a one-size-fits-all approach, but through tailored, precinct-specific strategies that build on each area’s identity and economic strengths.
Precinct groups and Council’s placemakers would be pivotal to this approach. Their local knowledge, networks, and capacity to activate public spaces can be better harnessed through structured resourcing and stronger two-way collaboration with businesses. For example:
- Retail and hospitality could benefit from precinct-wide marketing campaigns and shared security services.
- Professional services could be engaged through strategic planning forums and innovation precinct development.
- Precinct like the East End, Grote Street, and West End could explore collaborative investments in lighting, cleaning, security and special events.
3. Carmel, How do you envision a city-wide Business Improvement District could complement existing Council initiatives in the business and economic development space?
A city-wide BID—or a hybrid BID/levy model—would not replace what Council or AEDA already do. Instead, it would amplify and localise their efforts while bringing new funding and coordination mechanisms into the mix.
The fact is, Council can’t- and shouldn’t—be expected to do it all alone. A hybrid model could unlock additional private-sector investment, giving businesses a direct say in how their trading environments evolve, while also aligning with Council’s goals around economic growth, vibrancy, and city activation.
This conversation becomes even more urgent in light of the recent ESCOSA report, which flagged the City of Adelaide as being at risk of becoming financially unsustainable. Much of that risk stems from the cost burden of maintaining State Government infrastructure such as the Adelaide Bridge, the Torrens Weir, and large parts of the Park Lands—facilities that serve all South Australians and visitors, not just city ratepayers. These assets provide significant public benefit beyond the city’s boundaries, yet their ongoing maintenance is disproportionately funded by Council through general rates. That model simply isn’t equitable or sustainable in the long term.
A city-wide BID or hybrid levy model could help fill this structural gap—not by funding State infrastructure, but by creating a new layer of targeted, precinct-based investment that supports economic and place-based outcomes, freeing up core Council resources to address broader responsibilities.
BIDs are particularly effective because they:
- Deliver place-based outcomes—marketing, events, precinct branding, and streetscape improvements;
- Provide businesses with a unified, independent voice to engage with Council and State Government;
- Allow for data-driven evaluation, including footfall monitoring and precinct benchmarking.
Importantly, this kind of partnership framework would complement and strengthen the work already being done by AEDA, while empowering local precinct groups and placemaking officers to deliver results that are more responsive, nimble, and tailored to local needs.
It’s about building a city where everyone – Council, business, landlords, developers, residents, and visitors – shares in the responsibility and benefits of a more vibrant, inclusive, and economically resilient Adelaide.
Why New Revenue/Funding Mechanisms Are Critical
As highlighted in the ESCOSA report, Council is under growing fiscal pressure due to maintenance of State infrastructure on its books that serves a broader population. This includes spaces heavily impacted by homelessness, such as the Park Lands, riverbank, and transport corridors.
By securing State Government co-investment, leveraging precinct-based levies, and accessing philanthropic or business contributions through BIDs/Levy, the City of Adelaide could unlock dedicated, place-based funding streams that:
- Support local homelessness responses
- Fund services in public spaces
- Promote community safety through inclusion—not exclusion
Ultimately, a well-designed BID/Levy or hybrid model is not just about making our city more profitable – it’s about making it more liveable, fair and inclusive. If we bring together businesses, government, residents, and service providers with shared ownership of city challenges, we can:
- Build safer, cleaner, and more inclusive precincts
- Reduce the impacts of homelessness on individuals and on the broader community
- Ensure that every investment in vibrancy also reflects our values of compassion and social justice
THIS ALSO NEEDS TO BE A STANDARD AGENDA ITEM RE THE CAPITAL CITY COMMITTEE