The Minnesota Legislature's decision early Tuesday to at least temporarily scuttle $450 million in Legacy spending over the next two years revolved around a single provision buried deep in the proposal. Even though the Senate had earlier in the day easily adopted the legislation, the House spent hours debating the final language – and then never voted on it before adjourning at midnight, ending the five-month legislative session. The Legacy funding proposal will now likely be part of a special session of the Legislature. Passed in 2008, the Legacy constitutional amendment raised state sales taxes for the next quarter century for projects in four broad categories – the outdoors, clean water, parks and trails and arts and cultural heritage. With the state facing a $5.1 billion budget deficit, this year's Legacy money would for many state agencies represent one of their few sources of new funding. The provision that caused many DFLers to balk at the legislation was straight forward: Should the Lessard Sams Outdoor Heritage Council, an advisory group that recommends Legacy spending for outdoors projects, be exempted from the state's opening meeting law and instead be covered by different open meeting criteria. While supporters said the change was largely technical, and would help the council conduct business more efficiently, critics said it would have the council governed by less stringent open meeting standards and keep the public less informed. "I think this is absolutely wrong – it's shameful," said Rep. Michael Paymar, DFL-St. Paul. Rep. Dean Urdahl, R-Grove City, the chief House author of the Legacy legislation, at one point Monday tried to send the proposal back to a House-Senate conference committee to remove the exemption. Urdahl said he had earlier in the day declined to sign the conference committee's report because he objected to the language. But Urdahl reversed course a short time later, saying he was unable to convince Senate Republicans – primarily Sen. Bill Ingebrigtsen, R- Alexandria, the Senate's chief Legacy funding author -- to eliminate the exemption. "He feels strongly that they have the right position," Urdahl said of Ingebrigtsen. As he sat dejectedly in his chair following the House's midnight adjournment, Urdahl said the open meeting language – while important – probably did not single-handedly bring down the legislation. Nor, he added, was it the only reason DFLers had criticized the proposal. "If it wasn't that issue, it would have been another one," he said.