As a professional photographer for 25 years, who began as an amateur astronomer, the only bug I can detect is the one up the arse of all the posters on this topic!
Firstly, the added line indicating the shadow path, obliterates the most important evidence. The shadow disappears against the lighter parts of the image, ie.: over the water and the sky to the upper left. A meteor would be burning and therefore brighter than the background values.
There was no mention of a flash on the camera. It would have been utterly futile for clouds anyways, and would indicate the photographer had no clue about his mission. Everything was too far for anything but a 10,000 watt klieg light anyways!
If there was a flash, that just happened to capture an out-of-focus bug streaking across the foreground, there still would have been shading on a small 3D object, with the brightest spot nearest the center of the lens, and shadows as the light fell off at the edges. Here, the brightest area is on the side away from the lens axis.
The bug would also have to be flying exactly perpendicular to the optical axis for the shadow to be the same width across the frame. I would guess that the odds of capturing a bug producing this effect would be not much different than an asteroid!
I enlarged the most significant detail and increased the contrast in Photoshop, and it is obvious that there is light relected from the surrounding area and off the near sides of the adjacent lamp posts.
It was also reported that the light was indeed out the next day.
The halo away and to the right and below the light, indicates some asymmetry to the bursting light configuration, which would result from a support above and to the left, at 180 degrees, precisely where a shadow would be cast by the supporting structure.
Chalk up another one for Occam's razor.