It's the same cite that I provided to you when you asked here:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...t-is-correct&p=1541641&viewfull=1#post1541641
Sec. 23-7.1. Providing identification to police officer.
It shall be unlawful and a Class 1 misdemeanor for any person at a public place or place open to the public to refuse to identify himself by name and address at the request of a uniformed police officer or of a properly identified police officer not in uniform, or to provide false information in response to such a request, if the surrounding circumstances are such as to indicate to a reasonable man that the public safety requires such identification.
And that's a 1985 ordinance, confirmed still listed in Municode now. I have wondered a 100 times why it has never been challenged. And other "reasonable man" things have been tossed (such as the noise ordinances for the same reason -- no measurable test for that I think). As this was being discussed in the above thread, it was also (I thought) being added to the code tracker as there were other cities that had similar ordinances (still).