Staring down MTA chairman Tom Prendergast from their swivel chair perches on Thursday, state legislators repeatedly wondered aloud how the transit authority is presenting a $26 billion capital plan that does not include—even in the fine print—an explanation of where exactly that funding is coming from.

"I really can't remember any program that we closed down on that we didn't know—to the extent of that amount of money—where it was coming from," said Brooklyn Senator Marty Golden. "Corporate America would laugh at this. Any country would be surprised with this type of approach in funding."

"How does this make sense?” echoed Brooklyn Assemblyman Jim Brennan.

"[There is] an unbroken tradition of NY State at the legislative and executive level getting the funding necessary. I can't underscore that more," insisted Prendergast, a Cuomo appointee, on Thursday.

While Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio announced in October that they had finally come to an agreement on funding for the 2015-2019 MTA capital plan—$2.5 billion from the City, and $8.3 billion from the State—the plan has yet to be approved by the state legislature. The Governor's budget reiterates the multi-billion commitment, but without a specific timeframe for the payout—an omission some advocates deem crucial. From the budget proposal [emphasis ours]:

The additional funds provided by the state... shall be scheduled and made available to pay for the costs of the capital program after MTA capital resources planned for the Capital Program, not including additional city and state funds, have been exhausted, or when MTA capital resources planned for the capital plan are not available.

"I consider it to be basically an IOU, because the way I understand it is that the MTA has to basically exhaust all of its resources before it could draw down any dollars," said Senator Martin Dilan on Thursday.

"It's an IOU, but it's relatively common in government where those types of understandings are made," Prendergast tossed back.

Reached for comment earlier this month, both the Governor's office and the MTA confirmed that the budget proposal doesn't include a set date for when funds would be allocated. However, both offices insisted that the proposal is "iron-clad" in its eventual funding commitment.

Jamison Dague, a researcher for the Citizens Budget Commission, said this month that there's truth to both sides of the argument. On the one hand, the budget's language does technically back up Cuomo's funding commitment. On the other hand, "It does punt on how and when.... The State sort of made themselves a funder of last resort."

"The Governor has not included anything about where the money will come from," Dague added. "They could require the MTA to borrow from them. The concern is that the State wouldn't support [the MTA's] debt in the future." In other words, the current language doesn't protect the MTA from future debt if the State decides to loan its billions, rather than grant them.

"I have a very high confidence level that the money will be there,'' Prendergast maintained on Thursday. "Not without some challenges in terms of where you find the funding sources, I totally get that, but I have a very high degree of confidence that the money will be found."

Of course, even if the budget's funding was indisputably concrete, its fate would still be in the hands of the type of legislators who prioritize money for roads and bridges in the Finger Lakes Region.