A petition-blocking group is directly opposing efforts to get the Tax and Spending Control measure on November's ballot.

The union-backed group Nevadans for Nevada has sent paid workers and volunteers to locations where petition signatures are collected to combat the TASC ground troops with anti-TASC literature headlined, "Information About Beers' Deceptive Ballot Proposal."

State Sen. Bob Beers, a Republican candidate for governor, is the chief proponent of the measure, which would amend the Nevada Constitution to set limits on the amount the Legislature could increase government spending.

The flier states that it is "Paid for by Nevadans for Nevada (Produced in House)."

It is the first known effort in Nevada to target a ballot initiative signature-gathering campaign at the point where signatures are gathered. Beers said there have been similar petition-blocking efforts in states where spending-control amendments have been proposed.

The group's purpose is to educate people who might not understand the implications of a measure that may sound appealing on the surface, said Nevadans for Nevada's Chairman Danny Thompson, who is also head of Nevada's AFL-CIO union.

"You can't explain a 4,000-word constitutional amendment to somebody walking into the grocery store to buy milk," Thompson said. "The devil is in the details. We have volunteers and others who are out in the community trying to tell people what this (initiative) really does."

The initiative, according to the group's flier, "could lead to severe reductions in vital public services like education, transportation, health care and fire and police protection."

The AFL-CIO previously filed a lawsuit challenging TASC, saying the 200-word explanation describing the measure on petitions wasn't accurate. A Carson City judge ordered the union, Beers and the offices of the secretary of state and attorney general to work together to come up with an explanation that satisfied all of them.

Beers said Wednesday that the petition-blocking effort showed that the unions weren't really concerned with wording but rather that local government employees' cushy salaries might be imperiled by the initiative.

"Nevada's local government employees' unions, some of them members of the AFL-CIO, are the first-, second-, third- or fourth-highest paid in the United States, according to census data," Beers said. "They have a lot riding on this, because it's not likely they can continue to increase (salaries) if we impose reasonable fiscal controls."

The petition would prohibit state and local governments from increasing spending more than the combined rates of inflation and population growth unless voters authorized it.

The Nevadans for Nevada flier states that the lengthy constitutional amendment also contains "hidden provisions with harmful effects," such as counting a voter's failure to vote on a ballot question as a "no" vote.

At the Department of Motor Vehicles office on North Decatur Boulevard, near the Aliante development, on Wednesday, three men were trying to stay out of the hot sun in between approaching people with literature. By 2 p.m., they said they had run out of fliers but were taking names, phone numbers and e-mail addresses to send people information.

Anthony Lock, an unemployed truck driver, said he was being paid to campaign against TASC but wouldn't say how much. He said the anti-TASC effort was necessary to ensure people weren't duped.

"If you have a good spiel, you can get people to sign anything," he said. "We're just trying to educate people."

There were no TASC signature-gatherers at the DMV on Wednesday, but they were there the day before, members of the Nevadans for Nevada group said.

Thompson wouldn't say who else was part of Nevadans for Nevada. He said other unions and groups were part of the effort. He also wouldn't say how many ground workers the group has, how much money it is spending or what other tactics it will use to oppose the petition drive.

The flier states, "Beers' proposal is already opposed by a growing list of groups including Professional Fire Fighters of Nevada, the Police Protective Association and the Nevada State Education Association."

The education association, also known as the teachers union, is a partner in Nevadans for Nevada, union President Terry Hickman said. He said police and firefighters' unions are in the group.

"We came together because we have a common interest, and that is providing public services to Nevadans," Hickman said. "We're trying to protect future funding for our students currently in schools and students yet to come."

TASC is also opposed by business groups such as the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, but the chamber is not part of Nevadans for Nevada, spokeswoman Cara Roberts said.

The fact that TASC is attracting opposition of a sort never seen before in Nevada shows that the unions recognize that TASC appeals to voters and might pass, Beers said.

"This shows the lengths that they'll go to," Beers said. "I don't think they've ever faced such a well-crafted initiative."

Beers said he was confident TASC would qualify for the ballot -- which would require 83,156 valid voter signatures by June 20 -- and be approved by voters. He said he didn't know how many signatures the group had gathered so far.

TASC is a political action committee registered with the secretary of state's office, but Nevadans for Nevada is not, Ellick Hsu, deputy secretary of state for elections, confirmed Wednesday.

Hsu said he couldn't comment on a particular case because there are many exceptions and technicalities in the statute. But in general, any group that solicits contributions and makes expenditures on behalf of a candidate or ballot measure meets the legal definition of a PAC, he said.

There is a separate statute on groups advocating for or against ballot measures, which does not require them to register, Hsu noted. But such a group could still meet the definition of a PAC, which would require registration.

Thompson said Nevadans for Nevada was constituted under section 501c(4) of the federal tax code. Contributors to such groups can't deduct donations from their taxable income, but the groups have more freedom to engage in political activity than their tax-deductible 501c(3) cousins.