"We plan to pull both initiatives," he said Tuesday. "We're looking for a sponsor in the Legislature instead."

Munn said he is in talks with several state legislators about proposing a bill to do what the initiatives, both of which would have amended the Nevada Constitution, sought to enact.

One of the two initiatives would have put restrictions on government contracts, while the other was to ban taxpayer money being used to hire lobbyists for governments.

The Clean and Open Government Amendment would have prohibited recipients of sole-source government contracts from making political contributions, which the group said would prevent the appearance of tax dollars being doled out to political donors.

The Tax Backed Lobbying Ban would have prohibited government entities from hiring lobbyists to represent them, which the group said would prevent governments from pursuing an agenda not approved by voters.

Both initiatives were promoted by the ballot advocacy group of which Munn was chairman, although he said he had been brought in by unnamed backers and they were not his idea.

Munn on Tuesday said the backers were largely out-of-state donors, though he still declined to say who they were.

He said Sands Corp. Chairman Sheldon Adelson, who is assisting with other ballot efforts, was not involved.

Nevadans for Nevada, a group backed by the state AFL-CIO, had sued to block the two initiatives, charging that their stated purpose was a ruse and that they were really anti-union measures in disguise.

One of the initiatives contained a provision to prevent unions from taking member dues from paychecks, while the other was defined in a manner that would bar public employee unions from making political contributions.

The unions' legal challenge charged that the initiatives violated the rule that ballot questions address only one subject, misled petition signers in the way they were described and were likely to be found unconstitutional if enacted.

Munn said Tuesday that because of the time needed to schedule a hearing and hash out the legal arguments, the initiatives were likely to run out of time to collect the 58,628 signatures needed to make it on the November ballot.

The group had planned to begin a paid signature gathering effort this week.

Munn denied that the withdrawal of the petitions constituted a victory for the union.

"We're going to continue on with it, that's why we're looking for a (legislative) sponsor," he said. "They definitely put up some roadblocks, but we believe in it. We'll continue forward."

Contact reporter Molly Ball at mball@reviewjournal.com or (702) 387-2919.