Category: Urbanization

Posted on

Reader say with a new council in May and I believe it will be a golden opportunity to repeal ordinance 3066

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

Agree, so much of the division in town now is due to Pfund’s folly and the desperate attempt to let Valley quickly get its expansion in.

Step by step, building by building, we can re-make our downtown without Pfund’s folly. Contrary to the ravings of a few at this week’s hearing, Ridgewood’s finest hour will not pass simply because we proceed in a logical, organized fashion to constructing a downtown that lasts into the next century without dragging down the rest of the Village.

Mr. Kotch is right, we may be looking at a new council in May and I believe it will be a golden opportunity to repeal ordinance 3066. How anyone thought it was a good idea to allow ” interested parties” to request changes to the Master Plan is a mystery. Who can be seen as more interested than the village residents? We are now forced to be viligent and ready to assemble in order to protect Ridgewood from misguided development.

From the Patch May 2,2012
Conflict with ‘H-Zone’ ordinance and planning board amendment

Although the , the saga continues. The planning board’s amendment to the Master Plan remains on the books and a future council could simply overturn the November vote.

Councilman Paul Aronsohn said it’s time for the planning board to rescind . “We need a blank piece of paper,” Aronsohn said. “It’s time to move on, it’s time to move forward…the mayor and council needs to step up.”

This whole nightmare can be reversed. Elections for three council seats, Hauk, Aronshon, and Pucciarelli, are on May 10th, 2016. That’s in 220 days. It’s time for a slate of candidates, whose platform is to repeal ordinance 3066 which among other things added Chapter 190, Article XIV, Section 143 allowing “interested parties” to amend the master plan.

https://goo.gl/YuUZUt

https://stopvalley.com/Minutes/2007-08-07%20Ordinance%203066.pdf

Posted on

Informed public must be heard

DSCF6184

file photo by Boyd Loving
OCTOBER 2, 2015    LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2015, 8:44 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Print

Informed public must be heard

To the Editor:

With all that is going on in the world and in our private lives, we often don’t focus on the very things where we can actually make a difference. I believe it was Tip O’Neill who said, “All politics is local.” There are several important issues that will be decided on by our Village Council in the very near future.

The council was scheduled to vote on an ordinance that would change the housing density in the Central Business District from 12 units per acre to 35. Many village residents worked hard to prevent this from happening as it has the potential of negatively changing the character of our village. Citizens for a Better Ridgewood, the leading opponent to the density change, had an online petition which garnered over 1,000 signatures that was seemingly dismissed by the current council. A gentleman recently spoke at a public meeting calling for a compromise: an increase from 12 to 22-24 units per acre. His suggestion made so much sense and I can only hope the council listened.

The proposed 90-foot baseball diamond at the Schedler property is another case in point. Many villagers have signed petitions and spoken out at public meetings to prevent this from happening for years. They have offered proposals that would allow for a modest-sized playing field while preserving a historic home and 4 acres of woods. This compromise would allow the village to move forward in a manner that would respect the interests of all concerned parties. It doesn’t appear that the council majority will move in that direction.

We always hope that our elected officials will have an ear to the public and make decisions accordingly. This is not the case currently at the council level. Many recent votes have gone 3-2, always with the same council members in the majority and the two in the minority actively seeking to be more inclusive regarding public opinion.

A functioning democracy depends on an informed electorate. At the local level, you can truly have your voices heard and maybe effect the decisions being made supposedly on our behalf. My anthem used to be, “I fight authority and authority always wins.” With people working together for a common cause, we might be able to change the word always to sometimes. Hopefully, John Mellencamp won’t mind.

Linda McNamara

Ridgewood

 

https://www.northjersey.com/opinion/opinion-letters-to-the-editor/ridgewood-news-letter-informed-public-must-be-heard-1.1423982

Posted on

Readers say time Repeal “Pfunds Folly” ordinance 3066!

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

We have former Mayor and now appointed local judge Pfund to thank. Without Ordinance 3066, passed purposely in July 2007 when many residents were down the shore, applications to amend the Master Plan would never have even been considered. Then the developers used an old anchoring by applying for 50 units, only to say they’d “comprised” down to 35. The anchor number used should have been the 12 in the Master Plan, and they should have comprised at 18-24, reflecting current Village densities. Development is surely need in the CBD – it’s an eyesore with too much dead space and decaying remnants of the past – but Ordinance 3066 and the 50 number should have never happened in the first place. That’s Pfund’s folly…. These wheels have been in motion since 2007

I had little hope going into last night’s meeting. I am so proud of everyone who came and stood up for our village. Bottom line, we have to repeal ordinance 3066. Also, say no to ordinances requesting our Master Planner. Our Master Plan should be treated with the respect it deserves. It has been in place for decades, protecting our village from the potential high density developments that are on the table now. Should development occur, yes, but within the safeguards of the master plan. Developers: get a variance and if appropriate for Ridgewood it will pass. If the densities are to low for your project and potential profits, to bad, come to the table with something else. But don’t threaten residents with statements “if you don’t give us this, we’ll do something you really won’t like”. That is not neighborly or nice.

We should have been signing petitions to repeal Ordinance 3066 five years ago or more. I agree that 35 units is too high, but that’s because developers are allowed to submit proposals to amend the Master Plan under Ordinance 3066 (passed by then Mayor Pfund under cover of July summer vacations in 2007 to help out his pals at Valley), and its easy to anchor the debate initially at 50 units and then say you’ve “compromised down to 35 units even though the initial anchoring of the discussion should have been at 12 units as per the existing Master Plan.

Posted on

Vote on Ridgewood multifamily housing put on hold

Village Council Special Public Meeting

OCTOBER 1, 2015    LAST UPDATED: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2015, 5:23 PM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

Plans to take a final vote on the ordinances that would rezone four parcels of land in downtown Ridgewood for multifamily housing were put on hold as the council decided to commission more studies on the impact of the potential resulting projects.

Wednesday was set to be the final public hearing on the five ordinances and hundreds of residents turned out to hear the council’s decision. Those packed into the council chambers displayed signs and often erupted in applause after a speaker voiced opposition to the amendments. Reaction was similar in the crowded overflow rooms on the first floor where the public watched via live stream on projectors.

Deep into the evening, members of the council intervened to request more studies and analysis, echoing the call of many speakers who believed the governing body had not done its due diligence.

Between speakers, the council broke off into a discussion about possibly continuing the public hearing at another meeting since it was already past 11 p.m. and many residents were still on line waiting to speak.

The discussion resulted in Councilman Michael Sedon officially putting forth a motion to have a financial study on the impact of the new developments in the Central Business District, particularly in regards to the effects new apartment buildings would have on the tax base.

Councilwoman Susan Knudsen seconded the motion, asking Sedon to amend the motion to allow for a traffic study along with an impact study on the downtown area as a whole, to which Sedon agreed. As the discussion ensued further, infrastructure and school impact studies were also included in the motion.

Mayor Paul Aronsohn and Councilwoman Gwenn Hauck joined Sedon and Knudsen, voting in favor of having the studies done and continuing the public hearings to Monday, Nov. 9.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/ridgewood-council-holds-off-on-vote-1.1423164

Posted on

Village Council Tables Vote on High Density Housing

Village Council Tables Vote on High Density Housing
all photos by Boyd Loving
October 1,2015

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ , A huge turn out filled the the courtroom last night with some estimates saying there was another 300 people in the rooms downstairs watching it on the TV’s.It seems the people were finally heard. The council voted 4-1 (Al Pucciarelli the only no vote) to continue the hearings and conduct impact studies on the fiscal impacts, traffic (a comprehensive study that would include all off the proposed buildings as well as the 2 parking garages and the 98 unit assisted living facility), and schools.

 The resistance to the over development and urbanization was spearheaded by the Citizens for a Better Ridgewood . The group is  non-profit with a mission to make sure development is achieved within the character of Ridgewood.

They are in favor of development that compliments our existing CBD. “Our town has been reacting for far too long. It is time for a shared vision, a comprehensive plan that allows for extensive community input and can move us forward.”

DSCF6205 1

The council has postponed the vote on the ordinances to increase the density from 12 to 35 until those studies have been done. The next meeting will be held Monday, November 9th. Many people left because it just ran too late so If you want your chance to speak Nov 9th, you will be able to.

Reader said , “Partial victory tonight… tabled the vote! However the real solution here is to roll back the “Valley Hospital inspired” master plan changes which allowed these ordinances even be proposed in the first place.”

DSCF6184

Posted on

Citizens For A Better Ridgewood: TODAY….THE COUNCIL WILL VOTE TO CHANGE OUR VILLAGE FOREVER

CBD

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

We are overwhelmed by the number of residents who have emailed council members, canvassed the community to help spread the word, and shared thoughtful opinions on social media. You are all awesome! Ridgewood is amazing — and worth every effort!

THIS IS IT.

TODAY….THE COUNCIL WILL VOTE TO CHANGE OUR VILLAGE FOREVER.

THE FINAL VOTE WILL BE HELD WEDNESDAY AT VILLAGE HALL.

The agenda says the meeting starts at 7:30 pm, but please arrive by 7 pm to get a seat.

RESIDENT ATTENDANCE AT THIS MEETING IS CRITICAL

PLEASE bring your friends, family members, neighbors. A room filled with concerned citizens is our only chance to urge Council members to reconsider enacting these ordinances in their present form.

Details about the Meeting
Please come early and carpool, if possible. Park on both sides of Vets, at Graydon and on side streets, if needed.
The Mayor has stated that ALL residents will be heard (https://ridgewood.dailyvoice.com/…/ridgewood-mayor-a…/592174/).
If the meeting room on the fourth floor fills to capacity, overflow will be directed to the senior lounge on the first floor with a live stream of the meeting.
We encourage EVERYONE to sign his/her name, take a number and get into the cue to speak. Please approach the podium and say something as simple as “I oppose raising the density to 35 units per acre. Please vote NO.” The more people who voice opposition, the better. Short and sweet is good! It’s going to be a long evening.

This is YOUR village and you do have a voice. This will be your last chance to speak up!!

Thank you for your continued support! We hope to see you tomorrow!

Citizens For A Better Ridgewood

3 DAYS LEFT…..Email council to VOTE NO!Paul Aronsohn – paronsohn@ridgewoodnj.netAlbert Pucciarelli – apucciarelli@…

Posted by Citizens For A Better Ridgewood on Sunday, September 27, 2015

Posted on

Ridgewood downtown housing hearings wrap up Sept. 30

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

SEPTEMBER 29, 2015    LAST UPDATED: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2015, 11:41 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

As the second of two public hearings in front of the Village Council dedicated to multifamily housing nears, a long chapter in the town’s history may come to a close as officials will render a decision regarding the future of new apartment buildings in downtown Ridgewood.

On Wednesday, Sept. 30, residents will have one final chance to persuade the governing body to vote one way or the other.

The council is scheduled to take a vote on each ordinance, ostensibly settling the issue of high-density housing in Ridgewood.

What is unclear, however, is the status of litigation related to the master plan amendment as it has been revealed that neither the village nor the Planning Board has been officially served.

During a Sept. 15 meeting, it was brought to light by board attorney Gail Price that the Planning Board had not yet actually been served as defendants in the lawsuit.

The Ridgewood News reported last month that Citizens for a Better Ridgewood (CBR) had filed a lawsuit in state Superior Court against the Planning Board and the Village of Ridgewood, citing numerous irregularities, procedural missteps and alleged conflicts of interest as reasons the Planning Board’s June 2 decision to amend the master plan should be declared void.

A copy of the complaint obtained by The Ridgewood News certifies that it was filed with the Superior Court clerk on Aug. 10 and docketed on Aug. 13.

Village Attorney Matt Rogers said he was not aware of any service from the village standpoint, which goes through the clerk’s office.

This was confirmed by Village Clerk Heather Mailander on Wednesday afternoon. She said the village indeed had not yet received a lawsuit.

When asked for a statement, CBR did not directly comment on the status of the lawsuit, but did state the group is “continuing to pursue its original objectives, specifically to heighten awareness about significant zoning changes underway and to encourage the village to engage in comprehensive planning that is strategic and visionary.”

 

https://www.northjersey.com/news/ridgewood-housing-hearings-wrap-up-sept-30-1.1420947

Posted on

Clock is Ticking on High Density Housing for the Central Business District in Ridgewood

Clock_Ridgewood_theridgewopodblog

September 28,2015
Lorraine Reynolds
Citizens for a Better Ridgewood

Ridgewood NJ, As you may or may not know, on September 30th the village council will be continuing the 2 night hearing and voting on the 5 ordinances regarding the high density housing. These ordinances would increase the density allowed from 12 units per acre (current) to 35 units per acre (UPA) in our downtown. Here’s a comparison as to what some other towns in our area allow: Fort Lee 50 UPA, Teaneck 28 UPA, Englewood 12 UPA, Hackensack 22 UPA. If passed, Fort Lee would be the only town in our area, similar in population, with a greater density per acre. I do believe the majority of the town is accepting of development, but on a smaller scale. Maybe 25 units per acre? Do we really want to be built up more than Teaneck? I certainly don’t want to be anywhere near Fort Lee’s density.
The planning board spent approximately 3 years in discussions and 1 1/2 years in a public hearing before voting. The village council had a small portion of their Sept 16 meeting devoted to this and now the council will be coming to the sept 30th meeting with their written statements prepared on how they are voting and why. The Ridgewood News had an editorial last week about “what’s the hurry?”. I have to agree with them. While I don’t want this to drag out, I do want the council to do their due diligence and get all of the facts before they vote. During the Valley hearings at the council level, the council brought in the traffic expert, planner, geotechnical engineer, etc and each council member asked questions of these experts and based their vote on what was discussed at council.
It appears that the majority of the council does not want to bring in any experts. They are ready to vote without asking any questions of any experts as to how this will effect Ridgewood. At the planning board level, a concern about the increase this would bring to our taxes was brought up several times by residents. The discussion was always shot down, because “it is not in the purview of the planning board to consider finances.” In fact, the village planner stated, “residential housing almost always increases taxes, we should not be doing this if we think taxes will go down, but there are other benefits to residential housing.” The council has a much broader scope of items they can discuss, finances being one of them. You may remember that Tom Riche voted yes to the Valley amendment at the PB level, but no to it at the council level. That is because the council is able to look at a broader range of issues. Finances should definitely be discussed.
I would like to see the council bring in several experts in addition to a financial expert. Water must be discussed. I know this year is an exception with the lack of rain, but we have mandatory water restrictions every year. Can you imagine an additional few hundred apartments to supply? I can’t.
Schools must be discussed. The planning board did not have a member of the BOE at their public hearings. The council needs to ask Dr Fishbein to appear at the council hearing to answer questions.
The traffic expert, the engineer, the planner, etc should all be questioned. I do hear the planner will be there, but that’s it.
I don’t know how anyone could possible vote on something so monumental without questioning all of these experts to see what the impacts will be for Ridgewood.
I urge you to e-mail our council and ask them to have these experts at the hearing, get the facts first hand, and then vote.
These people are our elected officials, and we have a right to make sure they have done their due diligence before they vote.
Whether you are for or against the increase to 35 units per acre, I think we can all agree that each council member needs to be able to ask questions of the experts to help them in their decision making process.
Below are the e-mails of all the council members. Please send them an e-mail today and forward this to friends. Thanks
Posted on

Reader says The Village has been lucky to have politicians who were serving the citizens not developers….until now

3 amigos

…they say 1. ‘it’s to provide high end apartments to seniors looking to downsize, 2. To re energize our town which is apparently viewed as deteriorating and 3. If you don’t let us do this we will put something on the properties which will be way worse than apartments. People say aren’t apartments better than what is there now? NO. Why do you think they have been barren properties for so long? Because they have been told they have the support of politicians to get this done for them. High density apartments is the most profitable option for developers. For decades developers have wanted to crack our Master Plan which has always been in tact to prevent such overdevelopment. The Village has been lucky to have politicians who were serving the citizens not developers….until now.

3 DAYS LEFT…..Email council to VOTE NO!Paul Aronsohn – paronsohn@ridgewoodnj.netAlbert Pucciarelli – apucciarelli@…

Posted by Citizens For A Better Ridgewood on Sunday, September 27, 2015

Posted on

Reader say , The apartments will be filled with the people who always move to towns with good schools

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

Schedler and Valley people are tired of fighting and people are confused/think it is over anyway.

I am not one of those three but I will tell you this, the worst way to reduce taxes is to have high density housing that is not age restricted. The absolute worst. Actually no, the worst is that they are tricking seniors/empty nesters into believing that this is for them, if it were they would be age restricted. Fact is one of the developers admitted there is not enough market for empty nesters to even get a loan for that purpose so they are well aware that the demand is not there. The apartments will be filled with the people who always move to towns with good schools, young families who use services at a rate much higher than seniors.

So our beautiful town will not only be more congested but you will pay more for it.

Posted on

Citizens for a Better Ridgewood : Say NO to High Density Housing

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog
Please copy and paste this Quick and Easy email message to council. We MUST be heard. The more people who send the more we will be heard. Feel free to add your own personal touch.

Step 1: copy and paste these email addresses into the recipient line:

 

paronsohn@ridgewoodnj.net, ghauck@ridgewoodnj.net, msedon@ridgewoodnj.net, sknudsen@ridgewoodnj.net, apucciarelli@ridgewoodnj.net

Step 2: copy and paste this into the Subject line:
 
Say NO to High Density Housing
 

Step 3: copy and paste this text into the message:

 
 

Dear Village Council,

 

I’m writing to urge you to vote “no” on the high density housing proposed for our Historic Central Business District. The density is too high and should not be considered for Ridgewood. If you think it should be considered, please take the time to first listen to the people who elected you then take the time to hear from real experts about the impact on taxes, traffic, infrastructure, schools, property values, quality of life, stress on services, and more.

 

The impact on our Village will be irreversible and this permanent change requires more than just two meetings and a quick vote. It certainly requires you to consider the will of the public, the homeowners, the taxpayers, the residents, the VOTERS who elected you!

 

Posted on

Urge Village Council to Learn the Facts

clock_cbd_theridgewoodblog

Please read this compelling email from CBR Supporter, Lorraine Reynolds, and consider emailing Village Council Members.

Thank you!

Citizens  for  a Better Ridgewood
citizensforabetterridgewood@aol.com

All,

As you may or may not know, on September 30th the village council will be continuing the 2 night hearing and voting on the 5 ordinances regarding the high density housing. These ordinances would increase the density allowed from 12 units per acre (current) to 35 units per acre (UPA) in our downtown. Here’s a comparison as to what some other towns in our area allow: Fort Lee 50 UPA, Teaneck 28 UPA, Englewood 12 UPA, Hackensack 22 UPA. If passed, Fort Lee would be the only town in our area, similar in population, with a greater density per acre. I do believe the majority of the town is accepting of development, but on a smaller scale. Maybe 25 units per acre? Do we really want to be built up more than Teaneck? I certainly don’t want to be anywhere near Fort Lee’s density.

The planning board spent approximately 3 years in discussions and 1 1/2 years in a public hearing before voting. The village council had a small portion of their Sept 16 meeting devoted to this and now the council will be coming to the sept 30th meeting with their written statements prepared on how they are voting and why. The Ridgewood News had an editorial last week about “what’s the hurry?”. I have to agree with them. While I don’t want this to drag out, I do want the council to do their due diligence and get all of the facts before they vote. During the Valley hearings at the council level, the council brought in the traffic expert, planner, geotechnical engineer, etc and each council member asked questions of these experts and based their vote on what was discussed at council.

It appears that the majority of the council does not want to bring in any experts. They are ready to vote without asking any questions of any experts as to how this will effect Ridgewood. At the planning board level, a concern about the increase this would bring to our taxes was brought up several times by residents. The discussion was always shot down, because “it is not in the purview of the planning board to consider finances.” In fact, the village planner stated, “residential housing almost always increases taxes, we should not be doing this if we think taxes will go down, but there are other benefits to residential housing.” The council has a much broader scope of items they can discuss, finances being one of them. You may remember that Tom Riche voted yes to the Valley amendment at the PB level, but no to it at the council level. That is because the council is able to look at a broader range of issues. Finances should definitely be discussed.

I would like to see the council bring in several experts in addition to a financial expert. Water must be discussed. I know this year is an exception with the lack of rain, but we have mandatory water restrictions every year. Can you imagine an additional few hundred apartments to supply? I can’t.

Schools must be discussed. The planning board did not have a member of the BOE at their public hearings. The council needs to ask Dr Fishbein to appear at the council hearing to answer questions.

The traffic expert, the engineer, the planner, etc should all be questioned. I do hear the planner will be there, but that’s it.
I don’t know how anyone could possible vote on something so monumental without questioning all of these experts to see what the impacts will be for Ridgewood.

I urge you to e-mail our council and ask them to have these experts at the hearing, get the facts first hand, and then vote.
These people are our elected officials, and we have a right to make sure they have done their due diligence before they vote.
Whether you are for or against the increase to 35 units per acre, I think we can all agree that each council member needs to be able to ask questions of the experts to help them in their decision making process.

Below are the e-mails of all the council members. Please send them an e-mail today and forward this to friends. Thanks

paronsohn@ridgewoodnj.net
ghauck@ridgewoodnj.net
sknudsen@ridgewoodnj.net
apucciarelli@ridgewoodnj.net
msedon@ridgewoodnj.net

Posted on

Citizens for a Better Ridgewood Urges Residents to Speak Up at Public Meetings on High Density Housing for the Central Business District

village council meeting

file photo by Boyd Loving

September 25,2015
the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, the Village Council has now scheduled two public meetings to gather public input on the high density housing projects planned for the central business district .The two public hearings are scheduled for THIS Wednesday, September 16 at 8 pm, and Wednesday, September 30.

This is an opportunity to Voice your opinion or just be present to show you care about a series of “sweeping reforms” that will allow high-density housing to be built in our Central Business District.  The Village Council will vote on September 30. These reforms will change the character of the Village for ever and may effect both the quality of life and property values in the Village .

The grass roots group CBR urges everyone to show up and be heard .

A room filled with concerned citizens is a chance to urge Council members to reconsider enacting these ordinances in their present form.
This is YOUR village and you do have a voice. These two hearings will be your last chance to speak up

Posted on

Ridgewood continues talks on North Walnut Street site

town_garage_theridgewoodblog

SEPTEMBER 14, 2015    LAST UPDATED: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2015, 9:35 AM
BY MARK KRULISH
STAFF WRITER |
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS

With the prospect of a parking garage on Hudson Street and a vote looming on the fate of multifamily housing in the village, things are heating up downtown as summer comes to an end.

Last Wednesday, the council revived the subject of the North Walnut Street redevelopment zone and the potential future uses for the site, namely the possibility of housing for seniors in need of long-term personal care.

Preliminary negotiations have begun with Kensington Senior Development, which pitched an assisted-living facility for the Town Garage site at a council meeting in March.

One of the goals of redeveloping the North Walnut Street zone is to bring additional parking spaces to Ridgewood’s Central Business District (CBD).

The request for proposal (RFP) put out by the village stated a parking garage built on the site would have to result in a net gain of 100 spaces for village use. That number is beyond the spaces currently available and any spots reserved for the development.

Kensington proposed a 60-foot-high facility with 98 assisted-living units and retail space on the first floor for the 1.1-acre site, along with a parking garage to be built and donated to the village.

https://www.northjersey.com/news/talks-on-ridgewood-housing-proposal-continue-1.1409623

Posted on

Readers says This high density housing will probably go through even if a thousand people speak against it

Village _council_meeting_theridgewoodblog

file photo Boyd Loving

The mayor is such a liar. He acts like the idea of a second meeting is a new idea and he is jumping right on it due to the back to school night conflicts. So much bullshit from our egomaniacal leader. Boyd Loving spoke publicly in the summer and implored Aronsohn to have more than one hearing, stating that of course not everyone could make one certain date. In this instance the mayor stated that people could talk at other meetings during the summer (when it would not be an agenda item and when half the town is away). A woman from N. hillside spoke on Wednesday night and said she was there on the 9th because she has back to school night on the 16th. In this instance the mayor stared blankly at her and made no comment. This high density housing will probably go through even if a thousand people speak up. But those thousand people will never vote for Paulie Boy ever again.