Did You Miss Streetsblog’s Coverage of the Metro Board?
Way back when I first started writing Street Heat, one of the way that I attracted readers was to do long, in-depth coverage of Metro Board meetings. I would write a preview beforehand and a review afterward. When Street Heat moved to Streetsblog, I continued the practice even though the other Streetsblogs would just cover any news that came out of their local MTA meetings.
So here’s the deal, when I looked at this week’s agenda, I noticed it was somewhat lacking in high profile decisions compared to some of the others. Sure, there was Ridley-Thomas’ motion to audit Metro’s legal division, a plan to delay implementation of HOT Lanes, and the official addition of an underground option to the environmental reviews of the Downtown Connector; but The Source and other news outlets more than delivered the news. So, I decided to take a month off from doing the full Metro Board analysis to see what the reaction would be.
Here’s my question to you: Did you miss my coverage? Next month, do you want me to go back to writing a preview earlier in the week and a full recap afterward? Did you miss my sarcastic coverage of all the contradictory things Metro Board members say? Or would you rather me spend my time on other articles and just covering the major news out of Metro? Were the other stories I wrote on Tuesday and Thursday better than my usual Metro Board coverage?
Let me know in the comments section. Remember, I’m not talking about possible not covering Metro and its Board Meetings, just focusing on the news stories from the meetings only. And if you tell me you want the "old" Board coverage back, well, that’s what we’ll do.