The backers of a trio of ballot initiatives designed to make it nearly impossible to raise taxes via initiative petition and to slowly begin dismantling the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority have gathered more than enough signatures to file their measures with the secretary of state.

Former Controller Steve Martin submitted 122,921 signatures for the so-called Nevada Taxpayers Protection Act, which would amend the state constitution to require that all ballot initiatives seeking to raise taxes be approved by two-thirds of the voting public. And former Treasurer Bob Seale filed the so-called Education Enhancement Act, which would amend the constitution to divert growth in room tax revenue from local governments and the LVCVA to K-12 education. He also filed the Funding Nevada’s Priorities Act, which would amend the constitution to divert growth in room tax money to education, public safety and roads.

Both initiatives are the brainchildren of Las Vegas Sands Inc. and its chairman, Sheldon Adelson, who hates taxes and the LVCVA.

Currently, the Legislature must muster a two-thirds vote to raise or implement taxes, but taxes proposed on a ballot measure need only a simple majority vote. “Special interest groups are trying to circumvent the Legislature’s two-thirds requirement by placing massive tax increases on the ballot, where today they only need a simple majority vote,” Martin said, in a statement released by the firm of Adelson’s fixer, Republican consultant Sig Rogich.

Translated, of course, that means that underpaid teachers, finally fed up with a feckless Legislature handing out paltry raises, have decided to revolt by increasing taxes on casinos, including Adelson’s. If the Nevada State Education Association is successful in its drive to place a tax increase on the ballot this year and again in 2010, it will need only a simple majority to pass, since the two-thirds requirement won’t go into effect until 2010.

“Voters from all across Nevada have expressed their strong opposition to raising taxes on working families during these difficult economic times,” Seale said in another statement released by Rogich’s team. “My initiatives give voters a choice to effectively utilize existing tax revenues and invest them towards some of our more pressing needs, such as education, public safety and transportation.”

Translated: Voters haven’t really said anything about raising taxes, but this is a good way to make sure the LVCVA is crippled in its efforts to compete with Las Vegas Sands Inc.’s convention center.

Now, signatures must be verified on the petitions. If the petitions have at least 58,628 valid signatures, they will appear on the November ballot. If approved, they will all appear on the November 2010 ballot, too, since constitutional amendments must be approved twice. (And if both Seale’s measures pass, the one with the highest vote total becomes law.)

We couldn’t help but notice in this awestruck, first-person story in the Las Vegas Sun about MGM Mirage’s new CityCenter project this little line: “Overlooking the convoluted-looking roadways feeding the rear of the property is a ribbon of suspended concrete for a monorail that will link CityCenter with the Bellagio to the north and the Monte Carlo to the south.”

A monorail, you say?  Well, how about that?

See, one of the long-term plans for the Las Vegas Monorail was to travel to the west side of the Strip, which was ignored by the casino barons who built the original line to shuttle tourists to some of their lesser-visited hotels. But, along with extending the monorail to McCarran International Airport, going to the west side of the Strip was always a gleam in the Las Vegas Monorail’s eye.

But it seems that MGM Mirage isn’t waiting for that. By connecting the Monte Carlo, CityCenter and Bellagio with a monorail, the need for a second train is moot. (That’s especially true, given the people mover that has been successfully ferrying guests between the Mandalay Bay, Luxor and Excalibur for years; and the link between Treasure Island and the Mirage. Why, the company nearly has linked up the entire west side of the Strip single-handedly!)

Not to worry: Las Vegas Monorail plotters are continuing to push for a link to the airport, which they see as the road to success. Because linking the airport to the back door of several Strip properties can’t possibly continue to lose money hand over fist, the way the monorail has every single day it’s been in existence, right?

We’d never advocate people running up huge gambling debts and then not paying. If you sign a marker, you’re promising to pay back what you borrow, the same as any other loan. So we think that ex-NBA star Charles Barkley should make good on the $400,000 debt he owes to the Wynn Las Vegas.

(The Clark County District Attorney’s office is now involved, too, having opened a criminal case in the bad check unit, since gambling markers are considered checks under the law. The DA wants the money repaid, plus a 10 percent fee to the unit, or $40,000. We think that’s a little ridiculous, especially since Deputy District Attorney Bernie Zadrowski is also the chairman of the Clark County Republican Party, and the Republicans are well known for their deep, abiding sympathy for the rich. Isn’t there a member of the working poor they can zing for a bounced grocery store check instead?)

Anyway, here’s the thing about the story we find a little odd: Barkley has been upfront about the fact that he has a gambling problem. He told ESPN about it in 2006, estimating that it had cost him $10 million. And this could not have been news to the people at Wynn Las Vegas, who gave him two $100,000 markers on Oct. 18 and Oct. 19 for a total of 400 large.

What’s up with that? We thought that Nevada casinos didn’t cater to problem gamblers. Didn’t we hear American Gaming Association Chairman Frank Fahrenkopf going on about that the other day in the pages of CityLife?

Could it be that the industry was … what’s the word … lying when it says problem gamblers aren’t welcome in their casinos? Color us shocked.

It seems clear what should happen here: If a casino extends credit to a player who has acknowledged a gambling problem — as Barkley clearly has — then it should not be entitled to collect anything from that player, either civilly or criminally. Problem solved, since no casino would ever loan money it has no hope of recovering. (Dirty little secret: As much as the industry goes on about providing an “entertainment experience,” they’re really just in the business of separating suckers from their cash.)

That’s what should happen, of course. What will happen? Well, the legal eagles in Zadrowski’s shop will prosecute the only crime that matters in this situation — defrauding the casino. As for taking advantage of people who have admitted a gambling problem? They’re on their own.

Welcome to Las Vegas.