---
title: Douglas County’s Ballot Questions 200, 201, and 1A |  More Commissioners—and Who Gets to Elect Them?
description: Ballot Questions 200, 201 & 1A on Douglas County, CO 2026 Ballot | How the questions relate to each other, related cost, more | Colorado 2026 Elections
image: https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Douglas%20County%20Questions%20200%2c%20201%20and%201A.png
---

[Skip to content](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/douglas-countys-ballot-questions-200-201-and-1a#main-content)

- [HOME](https://whatsupamericans.com)
- [INTERVIEWS](https://whatsupamericans.com/interviews)
- [TALK TO US](https://whatsupamericans.com/interview-sign-up)
- [PRIVACY](https://whatsupamericans.com/privacy)
- [TERMS OF USE](https://whatsupamericans.com/terms)
- [CONTACT](https://whatsupamericans.com/contact)
- [BLOG](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog)

 Oct 29, 2026, 11:18:18 PM

# Douglas County’s Ballot Questions 200, 201, and 1A |  More Commissioners—and Who Gets to Elect Them?

[Marek Bobik](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik)

Share: [facebook-f icon](http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/douglas-countys-ballot-questions-200-201-and-1a) [linkedin-in icon](http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/douglas-countys-ballot-questions-200-201-and-1a) [Twitter icon](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/douglas-countys-ballot-questions-200-201-and-1a) [pinterest-p icon](http://pinterest.com/pin/create/link/?url=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/douglas-countys-ballot-questions-200-201-and-1a) [envelope icon](mailto:?body=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/douglas-countys-ballot-questions-200-201-and-1a)

*Colorado’s November 3, 2026 election*  
*Information reviewed as of October 29, 2026*

Douglas County voters face three related ballot questions about county government. Together, they address two fundamental decisions:

**Should the Board of County Commissioners grow from three members to five? And, if it does, should commissioners be elected by district residents or by voters throughout the county?**

The questions are related, but they are not interchangeable:

- **Question 200** asks whether to expand the board.
- **Question 201** asks voters to choose between two election structures for an expanded board.
- **Question 1A** asks whether all county voters should continue electing every commissioner.

Understanding these distinctions is essential. So is recognizing that the interaction between Questions 201 and 1A remains disputed.

This article explains the proposals, their potential consequences, and how commissioners are selected. It does not recommend how to vote.

## At a Glance

| Ballot question | What it addresses | Choices |
| --- | --- | --- |
| **200** | Increase the board from three commissioners to five | Yes or No |
| **201** | Choose between two election methods if the board expands | Five district-elected commissioners, **or** three district-elected commissioners and two at-large commissioners |
| **1A** | Preserve countywide voting for every commissioner if the board expands | Yes or No |

**Question 201 is a choice between two options—not a Yes/No question.**

Source: [Douglas County’s official 2026 composite sample ballot](https://www.douglasco.gov/documents/2026-general-election-composite-sample-ballot.pdf/).

## What Does the Board of County Commissioners Do?

The Board of County Commissioners is Douglas County’s principal policymaking body. Its responsibilities include adopting the county budget, overseeing county operations, making certain land-use decisions, and coordinating with other governments.

Those decisions affect transportation, public safety funding, human services, and other county functions.

However, commissioners do not control every public office or service. Separately elected officials—including the sheriff, assessor, and clerk and recorder—have their own statutory responsibilities. Municipalities, school districts, and special districts also exercise authority independently.

**Adding commissioners would distribute the board’s existing authority among more people. It would not automatically create new powers.**

Source: [Douglas County Board of County Commissioners](http://www.douglas.co.us/government/commissioners/).

## How Are Commissioners Elected Today?

Douglas County currently has three commissioners:

- **Abe Laydon — District I**
- **George Teal — District II**
- **Kevin Van Winkle — District III**

Each must reside in the geographic district associated with the seat. Nevertheless, **voters throughout Douglas County elect each commissioner**, not just voters living in that commissioner’s district.

This distinction can be confusing:

> **District residency determines where a commissioner must live. Countywide election determines who may vote for that commissioner.**

For example, under the current system, a voter living in District I can vote in a District III commissioner election when that seat appears on the ballot.

Commissioners are elected in competitive candidate elections, rather than appointed through the judicial merit-selection system or subjected to judicial-style retention votes.

### How long do they serve?

Commissioners serve **four-year, staggered terms**. Elections occur in even-numbered years, but each seat ordinarily comes up once every four years—not every two years.

The county states that commissioners are limited to two four-year terms; Colorado’s general constitutional limit is two consecutive terms unless voters authorize a different limit.

Expanding the board should not be assumed to reset an incumbent’s term-limit clock or authorize indefinite service.

Source: [Douglas County’s explanation of its commissioner structure](http://www.douglas.co.us/government/commissioners/).

## Question 200: Should the Board Grow From Three Members to Five?

### Ballot language

The official sample ballot asks:

> “At an ongoing estimated annual expense of $760,000 to $1,300,000 from County revenue that supports public safety, transportation, and essential county services, shall the membership of the Douglas County Board of Commissioners be increased from a three-member board to a five-member board?”

### What a YES vote means

A **YES** vote supports expanding the board to five members.

It does **not** elect the additional commissioners, identify who they will be, or independently resolve the election-method dispute.

### What a NO vote means

A **NO** vote supports keeping the three-member board. Questions 201 and 1A are conditional on expansion; neither independently increases board membership.

### Why the cost language is controversial

The citizen-led petition initially asked the expansion question without the opening cost statement. The sitting commissioners subsequently added the estimated annual expense.

Supporters of the added wording argue that voters should understand the financial consequences. Petition organizers object that the wording emphasizes costs and names essential services in a way that could discourage approval.

[CBS Colorado reported on the dispute and the county’s decision to retain the revised language](https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/douglas-county-controversial-change-citizen-led-petition-increasing-board/).

Regardless of the wording controversy, voters should distinguish three points:

1. **The figure is an estimate**, not a guaranteed expenditure.
2. **The expense would recur annually**, rather than occur only once.
3. **Question 200 does not itself ask for a separate tax-rate increase.**

Additional spending would have to be accommodated in county finances. But the ballot wording does not establish that a particular public-safety or transportation program would automatically be cut.

## Question 201: District Representation or a Mixed System?

Question 201 asks voters to choose how an expanded board would be elected. It provides two options.

### Option 1: Five district-elected commissioners

Under this option:

- The county would have five commissioner districts.
- Each commissioner would reside in the relevant district.
- **Only voters living in that district would elect its commissioner.**

A voter would ordinarily participate in the commissioner contest for their own district when that seat is up for election.

#### Potential advantages

**More localized accountability.** Residents could identify one commissioner elected directly by their community.

**More opportunities for geographically concentrated viewpoints.** A group that is a minority countywide might still elect a commissioner if it forms a majority within a district.

**Smaller campaign territory.** Candidates would seek votes within one district rather than across the entire county, potentially reducing some campaign costs.

#### Potential drawbacks

**Greater importance of district boundaries.** The placement of communities within districts could strongly influence election outcomes.

**Possible geographic competition.** Commissioners could face pressure to prioritize their districts over countywide needs.

**Less direct voting influence over the other seats.** Residents would not vote for commissioners representing other districts, even though all commissioners would participate in countywide decisions.

Importantly, district elections would not relieve commissioners of their responsibility to govern the county as a whole.

### Option 2: Three district-elected commissioners and two at-large commissioners

Under this option:

- Three commissioners would be elected only by residents of their respective districts.
- Two commissioners would be elected by voters throughout the county.

This combines local representation with countywide representation.

#### Potential advantages

**A balance between local and countywide accountability.** District commissioners could focus on community concerns, while at-large commissioners would seek support across the county.

**More than one route to representation.** Residents would have a district representative and could also vote in the at-large contests when those seats are on the ballot.

**Different perspectives on shared priorities.** The structure could encourage discussion of both neighborhood concerns and countywide spending.

#### Potential drawbacks

**Unequal constituencies.** At-large commissioners would answer to a much larger electorate than district commissioners.

**Continued countywide campaign demands.** Candidates for the two at-large seats would still need countywide visibility.

**No guarantee of political diversity.** Both at-large seats could be won by candidates favored by the same countywide majority.

**The key distinction:** Option 2 would not preserve today’s system unchanged. Its three district seats would be elected **by district voters**, whereas today all three seats are elected countywide.

Source: [Official sample ballot](https://www.douglasco.gov/documents/2026-general-election-composite-sample-ballot.pdf/).

## Question 1A: Should Every Voter Continue Electing Every Commissioner?

### Ballot language

> “In the event the Douglas County Board of Commissioners is increased to five members, shall all registered Douglas County voters continue to elect all County Commissioners?”

### What a YES vote means

A **YES** vote supports preserving countywide election of every commissioner if the board expands.

This concerns **who votes**. It should not automatically be interpreted as abolishing all district-residency requirements.

### What a NO vote means

A **NO** vote rejects preserving countywide election of every commissioner through Question 1A.

It does **not** reject expansion—that is Question 200’s decision. Nor does it select either option in Question 201.

### The argument for countywide elections

Supporters emphasize that commissioners make decisions affecting the entire county. They argue that every voter should therefore have a voice in selecting every commissioner.

Countywide elections may also encourage candidates to seek broad support and discourage an exclusively district-focused approach.

### The argument against countywide elections

Critics argue that a countywide majority can win every seat, leaving geographically concentrated minority viewpoints without direct representation.

They also contend that countywide campaigning can favor candidates with greater fundraising capacity, name recognition, or organizational support.

Neither outcome is guaranteed. **Countywide elections do not necessarily produce identical commissioners, and district elections do not necessarily produce political diversity.**

## How Do Questions 201 and 1A Interact?

This is the most complicated part of the ballot.

Question 201 presents two alternatives involving district-only elections. Question 1A presents countywide voting for every seat. These approaches cannot all operate simultaneously.

Commissioner George Teal has described a comparison of vote totals as determining which method prevails. However, initiative supporters and other critics dispute the legality and operation of the separate county-referred question.

[Westword’s October 28 reporting describes the continuing dispute and the prospect of further litigation](https://www.westword.com/news/douglas-county-confusing-commissioner-vote-makes-ballot-40954448/).

Colorado’s expansion statute provides for implementing the election method receiving the largest number of votes within the statutory process. **That does not, by itself, settle the disputed interaction between Douglas County’s separately worded questions.**

### How to read the possible combinations

| Results | General implication |
| --- | --- |
| **200 fails** | The board remains at three; the expansion-dependent election choices do not take effect. |
| **200 passes; 1A fails** | Question 201 supplies the choice between the two district-based structures, subject to applicable law and any court ruling. |
| **200 passes; 1A passes** | Countywide election has voter support, but its priority relative to the winning Question 201 option remains part of the dispute. |

Voters can express a preference on Question 201 even if they oppose expansion under Question 200. **Doing so does not convert their NO vote on expansion into a YES vote.**

## What Would Five Commissioners Change?

### A majority would require three votes instead of two

With three members, two commissioners can form a majority. With five, an ordinary full-board majority requires three.

That could reduce the concentration of authority and require broader agreement. However, a stable three-member bloc could still dominate a five-member board.

### Work could be shared more widely

More commissioners could divide regional appointments, constituent contacts, and policy-review responsibilities.

But additional members also create coordination demands. A larger board is not automatically more productive.

### Deliberation could broaden

Five people may bring more expertise and perspectives. They may also require more time to reach decisions.

Whether that improves governance depends on their preparation, conduct, and willingness to collaborate.

### Informal discussions would still face transparency rules

Expansion would not create a general exemption from Colorado’s open-meetings requirements. Those rules can apply to discussions involving fewer than a board majority.

Voters should therefore be cautious about claims that adding members automatically permits unrestricted private discussions between commissioners.

### Representation would depend heavily on the election method

**Question 200 changes the number of seats. Questions 201 and 1A address who elects the people occupying those seats.**

The latter decisions may be just as consequential as expansion itself.

## When Would the Additional Commissioners Be Elected?

Colorado’s expansion statute generally directs election of the increased number of commissioners at the **next general election** following approval.

If expansion is approved in November 2026, that points to the **2028 general election**, rather than immediately seating two additional commissioners.

Transition arrangements must also preserve staggered terms; the statute includes provisions for shorter initial terms in some circumstances. The precise Douglas County implementation would depend on the election method ultimately adopted and any applicable court rulings.

For that reason, it would be premature to promise a definitive seat-by-seat transition schedule.

Statutory reference: [C.R.S. § 30-10-306.5, procedure to increase county commissioners](https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2023/title-30/county-officers/article-10/part-3/section-30-10-306-5/). The linked reproduction is the 2023 edition; current law and subsequent rulings should control implementation.

## The Bottom Line

These questions ask voters to evaluate **board size, representation, accountability, and cost** separately.

- **Question 200:** Are the benefits of two additional commissioners worth the recurring expense?
- **Question 201:** If the board expands, should all five commissioners be district-elected, or should three be district-elected and two elected countywide?
- **Question 1A:** Should every county voter continue voting for every commissioner instead?

A voter can favor expansion but prefer countywide elections. Another can oppose expansion while expressing a district-election preference in case expansion passes.

The most important point is that **more commissioners and different representation are not the same thing**. The structure adopted—and the people elected under it—will determine whether the changes deliver better government.

## Learn More

- [Douglas County’s official 2026 composite sample ballot](https://www.douglasco.gov/documents/2026-general-election-composite-sample-ballot.pdf/)<http://www.douglas.co.us/government/commissioners/>
- [County resolution containing the expansion and election-method wording](https://www.douglasco.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/R-026-061.pdf)
- [CBS Colorado: Dispute over the added cost language](https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/douglas-county-controversial-change-citizen-led-petition-increasing-board/)
- [Westword: Questions about the competing election methods](https://www.westword.com/news/douglas-county-confusing-commissioner-vote-makes-ballot-40954448/)

## Current Douglas County Board of Commissioners

[Douglas County Board of County Commissioners](http://www.douglas.co.us/government/commissioners/)

### Douglas County Board of Commissioners Election and Party Overview

| Commissioner | Party | District | Commissioner elections won | Current elected term |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| **Abe Laydon** | Republican | I | November 2018; reelected November 2022 | January 2023–January 2027 |
| **George Teal** | Republican | II | November 2020; reelected November 2024 | January 2025–January 2029 |
| **Kevin Van Winkle** | Republican | III | November 2024 | January 2025–January 2029 |

Although each represents a district and must meet its residency requirements, **all Douglas County voters currently elect each commissioner**.

For 2026, **Teal is board chair and Van Winkle is vice chair**. These leadership positions are selected by the commissioners—not separately elected by county voters.

Sources: county biographies for [Laydon](https://www.douglas.co.us/board-county-commissioners/commissioner-abe-laydon-district-i/), [Teal](https://www.douglas.co.us/board-county-commissioners/commissioner-george-teal-district-ii/), and [Van Winkle](https://www.douglas.co.us/board-county-commissioners/commissioner-kevin-van-winkle-district-3/); [2026 board leadership announcement](https://www.douglas.co.us/commissioner-george-teal-named-chair-of-the-board-of-douglas-county-commissioners-for-2026/).

### Major Controversies Affecting All Three

#### A. The 2025 Home-Rule Initiative

The commissioners advanced a special election concerning a home-rule charter commission. Supporters sought greater local flexibility; opponents argued that the proposal was rushed, inadequately explained, and expensive.

Reporting describes voters rejecting the charter-commission proposal by approximately **71% to 29%**.

**What that establishes:** A substantial majority rejected that proposal.

**What it does not establish:** That the same voters disapproved of every commissioner or every county policy.

[Westword’s September reporting](https://www.westword.com/news/douglas-county-battle-over-commissioners-ballot-measure-40929581/) discusses the special-election controversy and its estimated cost.

### B. Open-Meetings Litigation

State Rep. **Bob Marshall**, former Republican Commissioner **Lora Thomas**, and resident **Julie Gooden** challenged the board’s meeting practices.

Two Colorado Politics opinion pieces describe a Court of Appeals ruling against the county concerning nonpublic planning meetings and executive-session procedures.

**This is more consequential than ordinary political disagreement because it concerns legal transparency requirements.** However, the sources retrieved for this portion are commentary describing the ruling. A publication-ready legal account should link and examine the actual opinion before making detailed claims about each commissioner’s personal liability.

The plaintiffs also accuse the board of unnecessarily extending litigation and spending public money on outside counsel. Their claimed fee figures should be attributed to them unless independently verified.

Sources: [April commentary](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/04/09/the-danger-of-when-government-goes-rogue-paula-noonan/) and [May commentary by critics of the board](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/05/27/from-secret-huddles-to-zebulon-the-high-cost-of-the-dougco-boccs-shady-governance-podium/).

### C. Questions 200, 201, and 1A

All three commissioners supported adding the cost language to Question 200 and referring the countywide-election alternative.

**Critics allege** that these actions confused voters, disadvantaged the citizen petition, and protected the existing governing structure.

**The commissioners respond** that voters deserve cost information and the full range of election choices.

A court allowed the questions to remain on the ballot, according to October reporting. **That should not be described as resolving every dispute over how competing results would be implemented.**

Sources: [CBS](https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/douglas-county-controversial-change-citizen-led-petition-increasing-board/) and [Westword](https://www.westword.com/news/douglas-county-confusing-commissioner-vote-makes-ballot-40954448/).

### Current Douglas County Board of Commissioners Performance Criticism

Residents, petition organizers, a Democratic state representative, and a former Republican commissioner have accused the board of:

- Insufficient transparency.
- Making important decisions outside adequate public scrutiny.
- Spending unnecessarily on elections and litigation.
- Handling public criticism poorly.
- Interfering with the intent of a citizen-led initiative.

But commissioners do not receive the same standardized “meets performance standards” evaluations used for Colorado judges.

A fair assessment should distinguish:

| Evidence | What it tells voters |
| --- | --- |
| Court findings | Whether particular conduct violated legal requirements |
| Documented votes and expenditures | What commissioners actually authorized |
| Resident complaints and editorials | What critics believe—and why |
| Election results | Whether voters supported candidates or particular proposals |
| County service outcomes | Whether budgets, infrastructure, and services delivered results |

**All three are facing criticism over governance and transparency.** 

The evidence reviewed supports saying that their collective decision-making has generated serious public and legal controversy. It does not, by itself, establish that all three are corrupt, have neglected every county responsibility, or are individually responsible for every criticized action.

 

 Abe Laydon

 George Teal

 Kevin Van Winkle

### Background

Laydon is the longest-serving member of the current board. Before becoming commissioner, he worked as a land-use and business attorney, served on the county planning commission, and held leadership positions in the Douglas County Republican Party.

### Public positions and priorities

**School security.** His official biography emphasizes security improvements following the STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting, including entryway technology and school resource officers.

**Transportation, parks, and open space.** Laydon takes credit for helping advance voter-approved funding for roads and for parks, open space, and historic resources. His biography also identifies him with the proposed **Zebulon sports and recreation complex in Sterling Ranch**.

These are the county’s descriptions of his accomplishments—not an independent determination that he alone produced those results.

**Immigration enforcement.** Laydon supports legal immigration but opposes state policies restricting local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. In February 2025, he called for repealing what he described as “sanctuary state laws.”

In a Denver7 interview, he said:

> “As a board, we support legal immigration. Go through the proper channels, and you will be fully supported.”

Sources: [official biography](https://www.douglas.co.us/board-county-commissioners/commissioner-abe-laydon-district-i/), [county immigration statement](https://www.douglas.co.us/commissioners-urge-continued-immigration-law-reform-efforts-following-failed-bill/), and [Denver7 reporting](https://www.denver7.com/news/politics/douglas-county-commissioners-slam-denver-mayors-testimony-during-sanctuary-city-congressional-hearing).

### Controversies and performance criticism

Laydon is implicated in the **board-wide transparency, home-rule, and ballot-language controversies** discussed below.

During the September 2026 hearing over the commissioner-expansion petition, CBS reported that Laydon warned audience members:

> “If you want to interrupt this body again, then we will step out of the room.”

Critics see the board’s handling of these proceedings as dismissive of public participation. The commissioners characterize their actions as maintaining orderly meetings and providing voters with necessary information.

**Assessment:** Laydon has identifiable policy initiatives and a substantial record. The strongest recent criticism concerns **how the board makes decisions and handles public input**, rather than an independently established failure across all county services.

### Background

Teal served six years on the Castle Rock Town Council before becoming commissioner. His professional background is in information technology and software consulting.

He is serving his second commissioner term and chairs the board in 2026.

### Public positions and priorities

**Immigration and law enforcement.** Teal has been particularly vocal about expanding local cooperation with ICE. He participated in the county’s April 2024 lawsuit challenging Colorado restrictions on local involvement in civil immigration enforcement.

He has argued that Denver’s immigration policies affect neighboring communities and public safety.

**Countywide commissioner elections.** Teal publicly defended the addition of Question 1A, arguing that voters should have the option of continuing to elect every commissioner countywide.

**Disclosure of expansion costs.** He defended the fiscal language added to Question 200. When CBS asked whether mentioning public safety prejudiced the question, Teal explained that a large share of county spending supports public safety and transportation.

Sources: [Denver7’s immigration-lawsuit coverage](https://www.denver7.com/news/local-news/douglas-county-sues-state-of-colorado-over-what-it-calls-unconstitutional-immigration-laws), [CBS’s ballot-hearing coverage](https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/douglas-county-controversial-change-citizen-led-petition-increasing-board/), and [Westword’s October ballot analysis](https://www.westword.com/news/douglas-county-confusing-commissioner-vote-makes-ballot-40954448/).

### Controversies and performance criticism

**Conduct at the ballot hearing.** CBS reported that Teal directed deputies to remove audience members who had spoken during the contentious September hearing. He also told one petitioner, “Hey, knock it off.”

Whether the removals were justified enforcement of meeting rules or excessive suppression of participation requires examining the full circumstances—not simply the audience’s reaction.

**Board transparency and litigation.** As chair, Teal has been a prominent defender of the board’s approach in the home-rule and expansion disputes.

**Assessment:** Teal attracts especially direct criticism over **meeting management, transparency, and the board’s response to the citizen-led initiative**. 

### Background

Van Winkle is the newest commissioner. Before joining the board, he served in the Colorado House and Senate, including as assistant House Republican leader.

His legislative service provides a longer political record, but it should not be confused with his much shorter record as a county commissioner.

### Public positions and priorities

**Tax reductions.** His county biography highlights his work advancing tax cuts in the legislature.

**School safety.** The biography also emphasizes legislative work on school-security improvements.

**The 23rd Judicial District.** Van Winkle identifies his work establishing the new judicial district—activated in January 2025—as a significant accomplishment.

**Countywide election option.** During the 2026 expansion dispute, he defended adding the countywide-election alternative:

> “We don’t get to make that decision for you. We are giving the choice that was hidden.”

That describes his public rationale; petition supporters dispute the characterization that an option was “hidden.”

Sources: [official biography](https://www.douglas.co.us/board-county-commissioners/commissioner-kevin-van-winkle-district-3/) and [Westword’s September lawsuit coverage](https://www.westword.com/news/colorado-state-rep-sues-douglas-county-ballot-measure-40932641/).

### Controversies and performance criticism

Van Winkle participated in the current board’s **2025 home-rule initiative and 2026 ballot decisions**, so the associated criticism applies to him as well.

However, controversies involving board actions before he joined should **not** automatically be attributed to him.

**Assessment:** His county record is comparatively short. The clearest current concerns involve his participation in collective board decisions, not a verified individual finding of misconduct or a comprehensive performance failure.

 

[voting](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/tag/voting), [political research](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/tag/political-research)

facebook-f icon linkedin-in icon Twitter icon instagram icon

- [Our Blog](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog)

- Privacy
- Terms of Use

[![WUA Favicon-1](https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Branding/WUA%20Favicon-1.png "WUA Favicon-1")](https://www.whatsupamericans.com)

---

**9249 S Broadway, Unit 200-536, Highlands Ranch, CO, 80129**

Copyright © 2024,

```json
{
  "@context" : "https://schema.org",
  "@type" : "BlogPosting",
  "author" : {
    "@type" : "Person",
    "name" : "Marek Bobik",
    "url" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik"
  },
  "dateModified" : "2026-10-30T05:18:32.696Z",
  "datePublished" : "2026-10-30T05:18:18.000Z",
  "headline" : "Douglas County’s Ballot Questions 200, 201, and 1A |  More Commissioners—and Who Gets to Elect Them?",
  "image" : [ "https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Douglas%20County%20Questions%20200%2c%20201%20and%201A.png" ],
  "mainEntityOfPage" : {
    "@id" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/douglas-countys-ballot-questions-200-201-and-1a",
    "@type" : "WebPage"
  },
  "publisher" : {
    "@type" : "Organization",
    "logo" : {
      "@type" : "ImageObject",
      "url" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Branding/WUA%20Logo.png"
    },
    "name" : "WhatsUpAmericans.com"
  }
}
```