Brooklyn’s $20K Lifeline Keeps Coney Island’s Mermaid Parade Afloat This June

With quirky traditions under threat, the fate of New York’s most flamboyant parade reveals both the city’s fragility and resilience post-pandemic.

For four decades, the Coney Island Mermaid Parade has served as New York’s annual invocation to summer and the surreal. Each June, the ragtag spectacle floods Surf Avenue with careening floats, bare-skinned merfolk, and enough glitter to replenish an estuary. It is an event difficult to miss and, until recently, took its own survival for granted. Yet, as the 44th parade looms, the city has found itself cobbling together the means—spare change and all—to keep its costumed revelers from going extinct.

The most recent lifeline is a $20,000 allocation from Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso’s discretionary fund, announced on May 20th. It comes atop a grassroots fundraising sprint triggered by Coney Island USA, the nonprofit organizer, which declared in March that mounting costs after pandemic disruptions had plunged its finances into crisis. Pandemic-era job losses and tepid tourist numbers have rendered self-sustenance challenging, while a new front—opposing the proposed Coney Island casino—has added to organizational strain.

The $20,000 grant joins a GoFundMe haul of over $40,000 and a medley of sponsorships and vendor fees. Together, they leave organizers “pretty darn close” to the roughly $120,000 needed to stage the event, says Adam Rinn, Coney Island USA’s artistic director. Bleachers must be rented, licenses secured, and—crucially for Coney’s avant-garde aesthetics—the annual cache of screen-printed banners produced. The math may be puny next to, say, the extra police hours lining the Thanksgiving Day Parade, but for Brooklyn’s iconoclasts, every dollar counts.

Assuming the remaining gap is closed, the parade will proceed on June 20th, shuffling from West 21st Street down Surf Avenue, wriggling onto the boardwalk, and ending—inevitably—in the campy grandeur of Steeplechase Plaza. On paper, Coney Island USA itself does not appear destitute: tax records show $5.5 million in assets, most bound up in its ornate Surf Avenue headquarters. But the liquidity crunch is genuine. For a nonprofit with minimal operating reserves, cash must be in hand—not just in bricks—by parade day.

It would be easy, and rather shortsighted, to imagine the annual march of tridents and tails as mere whimsical frippery. Yet the parade is an anchor for Coney Island’s battered local economy. The influx of attendees injects much-needed dollars into Luna Park, boardwalk bars, and neighborhood shops. As Reynoso recognizes, attendance remains well below pre-COVID levels, while many service jobs have evaporated for good. One more year of silence loomed as a forbidding precedent.

For New Yorkers, the parade is also a test of whether a city once famed for its spikiness can avoid becoming either antiseptic or sterile. The event draws on eccentric traditions—equal parts Mardi Gras, post-industrial burlesque, and aquatic daydream. Its possible demise would be a harbinger not just of parades lost, but of a calcifying culture where whimsy requires too many permits and too much cash.

Meanwhile, the prospect of a casino rising near Surf Avenue portends fiercer economic competition for local institutions. Some worry that deep-pocketed developers could crowd out the grassroots creativity that defined Coney in the first place. For now, organizing against the casino siphons both attention and funds from the parade. Gentrification, when coupled with municipal neglect, offers a wry paradox: property values rise, but those who animate the culture risk being priced out of their own bacchanals.

A global city’s struggle to fund the absurd

New York is hardly alone in its dilemma. Across major cities, festivals—be they San Francisco’s Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence or Berlin’s Karneval der Kulturen—find themselves ever more reliant on last-minute infusions and crowdfunding appeals to survive. Post-pandemic tourism patterns remain sluggish, while costs march ever upward. Even as arts nonprofits often own historic venues, their ability to convert illiquid assets into operations has proved as fanciful as the parade’s mermaid king.

In more robust times, such events punched well above their cost in terms of global brand, community pride, and urban vitality. Yet in the competition for discrete municipal resources—where policing and infrastructure always take precedence—parades with scant economic clout risk the fate of a sideshow: surviving on the largesse of administrators with an eye for optics and nostalgia. A $20,000 check may look buoyant, but it portends a future where creative risk hinges on political will as much as grassroots can-do.

Some may sniff at the parade’s self-preservation as vanity, or a distraction from hardheaded priorities. We would disagree. The Mermaid Parade, for all its froth and folly, is a proof of concept: that a messy, open city can still find new constituencies for delight amid the grind of urban recovery. In a metropolis that can feel tethered to real estate or headline murders, the saving of mermaids reveals something else running through the city’s veins—namely, the capacity to stage serious absurdity, and to fund it, year after precarious year.

Fiscal discipline and festival exuberance are, as ever, uneasy neighbors, but both are needed for a city to stay interesting. The plight of one grotesque, glitter-drenched event says something both about the city’s post-pandemic wounds and about its flickering willingness to heal them without capitulating to corporate blandness. The Mermaid Parade’s provisional rescue may portend hopeful precedent: when the hats are passed, enough coins may still be found to keep the city odd.

If New York is to remain New York, its appetite for the bizarre must survive the accountants, the speculators, and the ever-thickening wall of risk-averse bureaucracy. The parade’s near-demise and wobbly salvation should remind us that such events are more than frolic—they are a hedge, however paltry, against a city growing too comfortable for its own good.

■