Page 9 of 14
the incidental restriction on OFNB’s First Amendment freedoms is no greater than is essential to
further that interest.
In support of the Ordinance, the City professes three concerns: (1) public safety (in
particular, crime); (2) public health (litter and excess garbage); and (3) overuse of the City’s parks
(including crowding and access issues).
With respect to public safety, the City presented evidence at trial that crime in downtown
Orlando increased slightly from 2005 to 2006. TR at 183. However, the City made no showing
that any of this crime was related to large group feedings. For example, there was no evidence
presented of crimes committed on the days of the feedings, in the immediate vicinity of the
feedings or by people who participated in the feedings. Furthermore, there is absolutely no
evidence of crimes being committed during the feedings. Moreover, even if there was a
connection between the feedings and crime, there is no evidence that moving the feedings to
different parks around the City would lessen the amount of crime.
Similarly, there was no evidence presented that there is any problem with littering or
garbage in the parks, let alone one connected to group feedings. In fact, the evidence presented
shows that OFNB does not use disposable items at their events, that they clean up when they are
done and that they leave the park cleaner than it was when they arrived. TR at 197-98. The City
also argues that, even if litter is not left on the ground, group feedings in the park result in more
garbage which must be collected by the City. TR at 378. Again, there is no evidence that the
amount of garbage to be collected has increased as a result of large group feedings. Furthermore,
even if there were an increase in garbage, moving the feedings from one park to another does
nothing to lessen the garbage collection burden placed on the City.