Audience Tags Used in Events

Hello everyone! Welcome to Austin Avengers, a podcast where we will talk about the real issues reshaping our city and the people at the center of it. My name is Noah, and today we’re diving into a conversation that’s long overdue: gentrification in South and East Austin, and how we can actually fight back and slow it down with policy. If you’ve lived in Austin for a while, you’ve seen the change: once-affordable, vibrant neighborhoods are now dotted with luxury highrises and high-end brunch spots. I know I have, I’ve lived in South Austin my entire life. South and East Austin neighborhoods once known for their diversity, creativity, and cultural richness are now barely recognizable. And the people who built that culture? They're being pushed out. Displaced with nowhere to go. - In this introduction, I use my personal experience, inclusive language, and an urgent tone to build credibility and emotionally connect with listeners, setting the stage for a critical conversation about gentrification’s impact on my community.

We need to be brutally honest about what’s happening. Gentrification isn’t just about new coffee shops and cool apartments, it’s about displacement. Families, small businesses, and communities that gave Austin its soul, its entire character, are being pushed out by rising rent and unchecked development. And if we don’t act fast, we’ll lose the very thing that made Austin so special in the first place. - In this part, I use direct, urgent language and strong emotional appeals to emphasize the seriousness of gentrification, challenging listeners to recognize its real consequences and take action before it’s too late.

And also, let’s not forget about small businesses. They’re more than just storefronts, they’re community anchors. Whether it's a family restaurant, vintage shop, or local music venue, these places are what make Austin Austin. With the right support, grants, tax breaks, public-private partnerships, we can help them survive the tough times gentrification has brought about. - In this part, I appeal to shared values and local pride by emphasizing the cultural importance of small businesses, while offering realistic policy solutions to show that preserving Austin’s unique identity is both necessary and achievable.

Long story short this isn’t about stopping development. It’s about steering it. About making sure that our city grows in a way that respects and includes the people who built it. Because, if we let profit drive everything, we’ll wake up one day in an Austin that’s shiny, new, and completely soulless. So what do we do now? We must act. We must speak up.. We must push city officials and developers to commit to affordable housing, rent protections, and cultural preservation. This isn’t just a housing issue, it’s about equity, identity, and the kind of future we want for Austin. Thanks for listening. I’m Noah, and this has been the Austin Avengers. If this episode resonated with you, share it with a neighbor. Talk about it. Bring it to your next city council meeting. Because protecting Austin starts with you. - In this closing, I use a powerful call to action, emotional appeals, and inclusive language to leave the audience with a sense of urgency and responsibility, framing the fight against gentrification as not just a policy issue but a moral one tied to Austin’s future and identity.

Pao talks about her families business that was affected by gentrification.

Why CLT are important and beneficial to our community and how they can help more than just one persons business.

Only 20% of Americans trust their government, a shocking statistic that shows the how many citizens cannot even rely on the government.

A smaller call to action, a shift in tone, that helps to create an urgent feel, that the start of change begins with the communities.

The problem, Houston struggles with affordability, and with statistics like these, its easy for the reader to undertsand how much we would need a plan like this

"SMART stands for Safe, Mixed-Income, Accessible, Reasonably-Priced, and Transit-Oriented housing. It’s housing built for those who are lower income as a way to provide lower housing prices, decrease homelessness, and promote diversity and population growth.". This portion of text explains what SMART housing is, and what it stands for, as well as introducing the main stakeholders and audience for this podcast.

"Local and Federal governments can offer things like tax breaks, fee waivers, or density bonuses, which allow developers to build more units or save money if they include affordable housing in their projects. It's a win-win for the government if they lower homelessness at the same time.". This gives the call to action for politicians as well as shows the true message that we want to get across through this.

Opinions: Both Bueno and Garcia will share their opinions on the projects and we will continue to talk about the one we think is better.

It is personal. Because when your hometown doesn't feel like home anymore, what can you do? But here is the truth - gentrification doesn't have to mean displacement. Other cities have come up with better ways to deal with this. There are ways. So, let's discuss a few of these that could work in Sugar Land. First, inclusionary zoning. This is when developers are required to provide a percentage of new housing as affordable. So yes, build that new apartment complex *but make part of it affordable to people already living in this area.* The second solution is community land trusts. These, nonprofit organizations buy land and then keep the land forever for affordable housing. This way, the land truly stays in the community and housing prices don't go way up.

Is it flawless? No. We still have cases of displacement. But it demonstrates what is possible when a city tries to develop without losing sight of who is already present.Sure, there will be some that don't agree. Some landlords will state rent control will affect their income or the housing market. Others will claim zoning restrictions are limiting their development opportunities. Yes, those are legitimate concerns. But what is most important—profits or people?Because when push comes to shove, we are talking about people being pushed away from their communities. Their schools. Their churches. Their memories. Their stories. That isn't "progress"; that is loss.So, imagine watching the neighbourhood you live in disappear in front of your eyes. Not overnight, but little by little—year after year—until it becomes unrecognizable

Hello, my name is Sunny Bell, and welcome to another episode of Keepin' Austin Austin. For those of you new to the podcast, this is a place where people who love Austin's unique qualities think about ideas to keep Austin special, even while it is growing like a weed. --- Ethos is used here to establish both the speaker's and the podcast's credibility. This episode is part of an ongoing series, not just a single occasion. The specialization of the podcast on growth issues. contributes ethos to this episode

Many of these folks aren't coming here for the Austin vibe, but are here because a company moved their headquarters here. Many don't have any commitment to Keepin' Austin Austin. They show up here with their East Coast, West Coast money and coastal expectations for housing. --- Pathos is at work here identifying the needs of this group of people as a problem and putting them in a negative light.

They want high-end luxury, and they think it will be cheaper than where they came from. Bad news for them. It was cheaper here, but as we all know, it's not cheap anymore. --- This passage continues the pathos of negativity towards the newcomers. There is also an element of logos with comparisons of housing costs.

The corner barbershop becomes a little lemon, and the community institutions weather under a flood of half-caffeinated lattes. And worst, the existing residents get squeezed out of their own neighborhood. If we want to keep Austin Austin, we've got to find a way to stop this gentrification. --- Pathos is at work here trying to create the emotion of indignation at the unfairness of gentrification.

Let's welcome our newcomers, but put them where they are happiest, among their peers. Don't get me wrong, if someone new wants to live in a traditional neighborhood and loves it for how it is now, that's great, but let's keep out those who just want to destroy and rebuild. Here at Keepin' Austin Austin, we think we have one solution to this problem. --- This passage introduces the logos of the podcast, generally mentioning the podcast's solution. At the same time, it continues to use pathos to disparage the newcomers. The reference to the authority of the podcast inspires ethos.

Let's creatively use City of Austin zoning to address these issues. We will ask that the Planning Department and the Planning Commission consider these proposals and recommend that the City Council of Austin enact them into law. Our plan has two parts. Logos here introduces the argument.

First, we will change zoning to relax restrictions on development in wealthier areas. We will aim for allowing more luxury, high-rise buildings, speeding the approval process for new construction, and rezoning nearby land to allow for an expansion of the rich areas. Then, we will also use zoning to restrict certain types of development in traditional low-income neighborhoods. --- Logos is used here in adding detail to the proposal.

Specifically, we'd forbid developers from making affordable housing into luxury. Let's talk about what zoning is and how the City can use it to implement these policies. According to Kenton, writing in Investopedia, zoning refers to municipal or local laws and regulations that govern how real property can and cannot be used in certain geographic areas. Ethos is used by referring to the published expert's definition. Logos is used in the further advancement of the proposal.

Kenton goes on to explain that municipalities create a master plan and petition the City into neighborhoods and districts. Different rules will apply to different petitions in order to achieve goals such as creating certain types of living space for residents or promoting economic development. A crude example would be that you can't build an oil refinery in a residential neighborhood, but a more subtle example would be that certain neighborhoods are only for single-family homes with yards, not apartment buildings. --- This passage entirely uses logos to give details of how zoning works to provide a foundation for the proposal.

Turning to the City of Austin specifically, the City is divided into what are called base districts. There are 16 of these, which fall into basic categories such as single-family only or medium-density apartments. However, there are huge complexities within this through the use of what are called overlays --- Logos continues to be used in this passage as the general description of zoning is applied to the City of Austin.

These can get quite specific. For example, there is a Capitol View overlay district, which preserves views of the Capitol Dome by limiting the height of buildings along certain corridors. There are also specific overlays to preserve the character of historic districts, such as Aldrich Place, which is north of the University in the City of Austin. Logos continues to be used as the details of how zoning works in Austin are described.

But in practice, the rules are created and defined by the Planning Commission, a pointed group of volunteers, and the Planning Department, a division of the municipal government. We propose that Austin use overlays to selectively relax housing restrictions in some trendy, wealthy districts. This could include allowing more high-rise buildings, speeding the approval process for new constructions, and rezoning nearby land to make it part of the wealthy areas. --- Logos is further used to give details to the plan. This section also uses Ethos, because the legitimacy of the idea is demonstrated by the speaker's deep knowledge of zoning.

But so that these areas stay desirable, the City can, in effect, require that only new upscale housing be allowed. This can be achieved by, for example, requiring a certain size floor plan for new apartments. Even specific materials for construction and faucets could create more of the type of housing that would attract the wealthy newcomers. -- This section is entirely focused on logos as more details of the proposal are presented.

With more of this housing available, prices would be less likely to spiral out of control. The other part of my proposal is to make novel use of overlays to protect the low-income nature of certain existing traditional neighborhoods. This is turning traditional zoning on its head by using protections normally deployed in the service of the privileged to benefit the underprivileged. --- This section uses further logos to further describe the proposal. In addition, there is an element of ethos involved because the assertion of novelty implies that the speaker has expertise in the subject.

To support my point, Austin already has embraced this approach, in certain ways through the creation of a category called Homestead Preservation Districts, as described by the Mount Bonnell Project. But this has only happened in one place in East Austin, and was narrow in its goals, as described by the City on its website. My proposal aims for the broader use of Homestead Preservation Districts. --- This section entirely relies on logos in describing the context for the proposal.

In this part of my proposal, zoning would be deployed to significantly limit the expansion of housing stock in traditional neighborhoods. By restricting growth, there wouldn't be enough places for the wealthy newcomers to live, even if they wanted to. --- This passage continues to use the logos to describe the proposal and then use logos in another way to make a logical argument to support the proposal.

However, there is a potential pitfall here. Fewer apartments that are harder to find could create scarcity that makes traditional low-income housing more so often, and even more expensive once they are remodeled into luxury. We propose to attack this problem by limiting the ability of developers and new residents to make existing rental units more upscale and desirable. Nothing can be built in Austin without a building permit that describes the work and the cost of the work. The City could set a limit on how much you could spend upgrading apartments and avoid these pitfalls. --- Logos is deployed here to highlight a possible problem and then demonstrate the proposal has a solution. This also invokes this because the speaker is shown to have carefully thought through the implications of the proposal and therefore the speaker has more credibility.

Rhetoric surrounding gentrification has becomes outdated- referencing Eliot Tretter's article, we have approached our understanding of rhetoric in the same way for decades. Why shouldn't there be a resurgence?

Gentrification is a long-standing topic of debate, and, as proven in Whitman's writing, one that exists to persist. How can we change something which has continued to persist throughout time, and which acts not only as an antagonist but a catalyst for modern change?

Acknowledging the Counter-Argument, Presents the opposing viewpoint, appealing to Logos and acknowledging the economic benefits often cited by Stakeholders.

Detailing Implementation Strategies

Addressing Potential Objections & Conclusion

Local businesses having to face rising rent costs: Explains how the rising cost of living in South Congress is displacing both small businesses and long-time residents, showing how the economy and cultural loss are connected. This helps listeners see the broader impact of gentrification on the entire community, emphasizing the urgency of the issue. This encourages both residents and policymakers to consider what’s really at stake when rents start to rise.

The relationship between local businesses and long-time residents:Highlighting the emotional and cultural value of small businesses by emphasizing how much they provide to the community and the personal connections they’ve built. By using pathos, it helps listeners understand that losing these businesses is about more than economic problems, it’s about originality and belonging. This connection resonates with long-time residents and anyone who values Austin's culture and community.

The good and bad things about new high-end retailers: The complexity of gentrification shows how new businesses bring economic benefits but also contribute to displacement. This approach appeals to a broader audience by recognizing multiple sides of this issue. As well as encouraging listeners to consider the social cost of economic development.

City planners and local government: Addressing city planners and government officials directly shows how their decisions can shape the future of Austin’s identity. By contrasting two possible outcomes, it persuades listeners to care more about policy choices. This encourages community engagement, urging local leaders and community members to take action before Austin loses its unique history, culture, and image.

Counterargument: Acknowledging the opposing views shows that concerns about economic growth and development are valid. I'm able to present a balanced argument that respects the perspectives of developers and residents while still reinforcing why local businesses must be included in Austin's growth and development. This counterargument appeals to a wide range of stakeholders from landlords to longtime community members.

“Before vs. Now” photo collage

Highlighting CoUrbanize example and emphasizing community voice

demonstrate counter argument

The possibility of a CLT is in the hands of the city.

CLT's are like a group project, everyone needs to chip in their fair share.

Highlighting that we need to preserve the communities that are being pushed out promotes a sympathetic tone amongst the audience.

Hey everyone. Thanks for being here. Today, I want to discuss something that I find extremely important. We talk about it, it is an issue that has been overlooked, so I am here to change that. Today I will be talking about South Congress Avenue. If you live in Austin or have spent any time around here, you know the area, and you already know it's not just another street. It has always had its own culture. Live music, local artists, taco trucks, vintage stores, families walking around, small businesses that have been there forever.

It's always been one of those places that make a city feel unique, in this case Austin. But lately, it's started to change significantly. You walk down South Congress now and you still see some of the old spots, but they're surrounded by luxury apartments, high-end chain stores, and places clearly designed for tourists. I use a personal and honest tone to connect with people who know Austin, building trust while showing how South Congress has shifted from a unique, local space to something more commercial.

Those opposed to rent control argue that it discourages developers or leads to poorer housing conditions. However, that's not necessarily true if the policy is well-designed and effectively enforced. As Dorazio at the Center for American Progress explains, “Localized rent control efforts can help reduce displacement without halting all new development.” So it's not either-or. We can have growth and still protect residents. Rent control helps people stay. That's what matters. But even rent control won't solve everything. That's why we also need anti-displacement policies.

That means creating programs that support local business owners, especially those who've been serving the community for years. It also means protecting homeowners from rising property taxes, offering grants to renters, and ensuring tenants are aware of their rights. To put this into perspective, I respond to common counterarguments with evidence and logic, showing that rent control can work alongside development, and I expand the solution by pushing for anti-displacement policies that focus on protecting the people and businesses who make the community feel like home.

Portland has already implemented something similar with its Anti-Displacement Action Plan. They offer rent assistance, repair grants, and support for community organizations. They didn't stop development. They just made it more balanced. This could be established in Austin. There are also other ideas we should explore, such as inclusionary zoning, which would require developers to incorporate affordable housing into new construction, or community land trusts, which can keep housing permanently affordable by removing the land from the market. These solutions already exist. We don't have to invent anything new.

We just have to care enough to use them. Beyond policy, though, this is about values. Do we want to be a city that protects its people, or one that only accommodates wealth? Do we want to preserve what makes Austin what it is? And no, this isn't about being anti-business or anti-growth. I use real examples and practical solutions to show that cities like Portland have already taken steps to balance growth with fairness, and I shift the focus from just policy to values by asking what kind of city we want Austin to be.