In City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc., 535 U.S. 425 [2002], the Supreme Court held that: "a municipality may rely on any evidence that is reasonably believed to be relevant for demonstrating a connection between speech and a susantial government interest. This is not to say that a municipality can get away with shoddy data or reasoning. The municipality's evidence must fairly support the rationale for its ordinance . . . If plaintiffs succeed in casting doubt on a municipality's rationale . . . either by demonstrating that the municipality's evidence does not support its rationale or by furnishing evidence that disputes the municipality's factual findings . . . the burden shifts back to the municipality to supplement the record with evidence renewing support for a theory that justifies its ordinance."