Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Events Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Peruvian parade organizers tell Paterson council they were denied permit application; city told to clarify process
Summary
Representatives of a 39‑year‑old Peruvian parade told the council they were not given a permit application and that a newly formed group was granted a permit filed after the original group's request. Organizers asked the city for transparency and a review of the permit process.
Multiple leaders of the long‑running Peruvian Parade and Festival told the Paterson council on May 13 that their organization was treated unfairly in the 2025 permit process and asked the city for clarity and fairness.
Mariela Seclen, identified herself as president of the parade’s board of trustees, said the group submitted a letter of intent last July and followed instructions but was told the application "was not even submitted." She said a newly formed organization led by a former parade president filed an application the next day and was granted a permit. "We simply want to understand what happened, and more importantly, how do we fix it together," Seclen said.
Trustees and other longtime parade volunteers said they had gone to city offices, were given an application in January, and delivered a completed permit on Jan. 27 but were told City staff would not accept payment and would forward the application for legal review. Hector Castillo and Mimi Sepulveda said they called and visited city departments multiple times and received no final communication about their application; Castillo said he had been told applications must be filed six months in advance.
Representatives for a different group, New Jersey Peruvian Inc., told the council they had followed the city’s rules and were not under investigation. "We respectfully ask that the city council recognize the integrity and time our process has been followed," Carlos Tello said on behalf of New Jersey Peruvian Inc.
Speakers asked the council to examine filings, stamped dates and the city’s permit process. No formal action or vote was taken; multiple speakers asked city staff to produce a clear record and to explain why one application moved forward while another remained on hold.
Council members said they would review the packet materials and encouraged staff to clarify the timeline and provide documentation to the council and the public.
