Plaintiff has a First Amendment interest in filming public officials at a public meeting. Smith v. City of Cumming, 212 F.3d 1332, 1333 (11th Cir.2000) (“The First Amendment protects the right to gather information about what public officials do on public property, and specifically, a right to record matters of public interest.”). Prohibiting Plaintiff from video recording the meeting — even while permitting her to attend the meeting, take notes, or make audio recordings — impacted how she was able to obtain access to and present information about the City Council and its proceedings. See Blackston v. State of Ala., 30 F.3d 117, 120 (11th Cir.1994)….

The Eleventh Circuit has held that city council meetings are “limited” public fora. “[T]he government may restrict access to limited public fora by content-neutral conditions for the time, place, and manner of access, all of which must be narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest.” Additionally, the Eleventh Circuit has consistently recognized that the government has a significant interest in “conducting orderly, efficient meetings of public bodies.”

Nevertheless, the Court finds that Plaintiff has presented sufficient evidence to create an issue of fact as to whether the restriction on video recording was narrowly tailored to serve the City of Cumming’s significant government interest…. [A] reasonable jury could conclude that Mayor Gravitt’s restrictive policy announced at the April 17, 2012 meeting was a total ban on filming in City Council meetings. If the restriction was a total ban, it burdens more speech than necessary to further the City’s interest in maintaining order and efficiency at its City Council meetings; consequently, the restriction was not narrowly tailored to serve the government interest….

[On the other hand,] if Mayor Gravitt’s policy limited Plaintiff only from filming in the center aisle — in light of his belief that the location of Plaintiff’s tripod could create a safety hazard and that her filming could disrupt the decorum of the meeting — the restriction may have been a constitutional time, place, and manner regulation….