LANSING, MI - Republican gubernatorial candidate Bill Schuette's plan to fix the roads contains exactly one number: $250 million.

He says that's the amount of money Michigan will save from repealing prevailing wage. The only problem: that money may not exist.

The number is based on a 2007 study from a free-market think tank, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. But the study itself doesn't project a state-level savings of $250 million. Instead it:

Assumes a 10 percent savings on construction projects without prevailing wage;

Uses data from 2002;

Finds that in 2002, not having prevailing wage would have saved state and local governments $216 million, or $250 million in 2007 dollars;

Specifies $126 million of that would be savings to local governments and school districts, not the state

Asked about the fact that most of the projected savings would go to local school districts and wouldn't be available for the state to spend on roads, Schuette stood by the number in an August interview.

"I think it will be a significant number, you know, at or near that number," Schuette said.

Prevailing wage guaranteed union-level wages on state-funded construction projects. The legislature repealed it earlier this year, citing anticipated savings.

The nonpartisan House and Senate fiscal agencies declined to speculate on how much the move could save the state. Research into the subject nationally has produced wildly mixed results. But no study, including the one Schuette references, predicts Michigan will see $250 million in state savings.

Thinking money will show up in the budget and be available to turn into road funding doesn't ring true to economists.

Michigan State University Professor of Economics Charles Ballard said he found it "implausible."

Mitch Bean, a former director of the House Fiscal Agency who co-founded the firm Great Lakes Economic Consulting, was more direct.

"I think that's bulls**t. You can quote me on that," Bean said.

$250M only part of Schuette's road plan

As Schuette and Democratic gubernatorial contender Gretchen Whitmer traverse the state for the governor contest they've run into what many Michigan residents have: potholes.

Gov. Rick Snyder signed a road funding package that will kick an extra $1.2 billion into road funding when fully phased-in in 2021. But even with that additional investment, Michigan's roads are getting worse.

The 21st Century Infrastructure Commission established by Gov. Rick Snyder found in a 2016 report the state would need to invest an additional $2.2 billion per year to get 95 percent of interstates, 85 percent of state highways and 85 percent of local roads in good or fair condition.

Schuette doesn't have a complete road funding plan for the public to review, but he outlined it in an interview. The $250 million he anticipates the state saving from repealing prevailing wage is just part of it, he said.

He'd also like to have a complete review of how MDOT allocates funding, get guarantees and warranties on road construction, make roads a priority within the existing budget and seek additional road funding from the federal government.

"We need to increase our federal transportation dollar funding back to Michigan," Schuette said, and his relationship with President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence - both of whom have endorsed him - would help secure additional federal funding.

Bill Gelineau, the Libertarian candidate for governor, is releasing his road plan in two weeks. But the basics include taking out bonds and paying for them with targeted reductions, mainly from reducing the prison population and de-funding specific programs within the Michigan Strategic Fund, he said.

Whitmer, Schuette's Democratic opponent in the race, has toured the state touting her plan to "fix the damn roads," along with other infrastructure, by establishing an infrastructure bank and investing $2 billion in state money and drawing down $1 billion in federal money, too.

But to do it, she leaves open the possibility of the state increasing user fees or issuing bonds - something Schuette says would ultimately lead to tax hikes.

"Raising taxes is what the Democrats, that is what they first want to do. This infrastructure bank simply, the only way it can be filled is with billions and billions of taxes. And that's their plan," Schuette said.

Whitmer is critical of Schuette's plan, too.

"Those are phony numbers. And $250 million doesn't get us anywhere near to where we need to be in terms of rebuilding roads," Whitmer said.

Al Pscholka, a former Republican lawmaker from Southwest Michigan who chaired the House Appropriations Committee and later served as the state budget director under Snyder before leaving for the private sector, looked more favorably on the possibility of a tax increase.

"She's trying to generate more money for roads, which we are going to need," he said of Whitmer's plan.

"And I think any candidates that are running for statewide offices that claim it's just in the budget, somewhere hiding in the general fund, are not being particularly honest. I mean I don't think It's there."

Most prevailing wage savings wouldn't go to state

The repeal of prevailing wage affects principally two areas: school construction and road construction.

Most of the savings cited in the Mackinac Center study, $126 million of the $250 million the center calculates, would be on local school construction projects.

"The local education projects... either the districts are going to be able to build more buildings, or it's going to be savings for local taxpayers. Presumably the bonds they take out locally, they wouldn't ask for as much or need as much," said Jarrett Skorup, director of marketing and communications for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, which put out the 2007 report Schuette cites.

While that may save local taxpayers money, it won't enter the state coffers or be available for road spending.

Most of the potential for state-level savings is on construction projects, but a federal law throws a wrench in those plans. The federal Davis-Bacon Act mandates prevailing wage on construction projects receiving federal funding.

While the Mackinac Center study from 2007 assumed all that federal money would be concentrated in a few projects and the bulk of the spending would be free of prevailing wage requirements, The House Fiscal Agency noted in its analysis of the prevailing wage initiative meant "almost all" of the Michigan Department of Transportation's construction contracts would still be subject to prevailing wage requirements.

In the current Fiscal Year 2018, which ends Oct. 1, MDOT's construction program will spend $1.48 billion, according to department spokesperson Jeff Cranson. Of that, just $183 million is spent on projects funded solely by state dollars. The remaining $1.3 billion - the bulk of the spending - is still subject to federal prevailing wage laws.

Neither the free-market Mackinac Center in that study or the main group that pushed prevailing wage repeal pegs state-level savings at the $250 million Schuette cites.

Jeff Wiggins, state director of the Associated Builders and Contractors of Michigan, the anti-prevailing wage group which has endorsed Schuette, ball-parked the state-level savings at $70 to $100 million as the state works to extricate some of those federal funds.

"It all depends on how the state legislature mingles those funds," Wiggins said.

The Mackinac Center doesn't know whether the $250 million number is accurate in 2018. It's "definitely an outdated number," Skorup said.

State spending on infrastructure has gone up. But the job market is also tight now, meaning it may be hard for construction companies to get workers for the lower wages anticipated due to prevailing wage repeal.

Bean said the study's numbers, based off 2002 data, is not reliable for predicting savings in 2018 because of how much the state's economy has changed.

Both Bean and Ballard also point out the Mackinac Center has an ideological slant. The free-market think tank tends to align with conservative issues.

"All studies should be taken with a grain of salt. And if it's a study coming from an organization with a very, very strong slant, maybe you add an extra grain of salt," Ballard said.

Presented with the potential pitfalls in the data, Schuette spokesman John Sellek said the numbers in the Mackinac Center's study should be adjusted for inflation, which still would not bring state-level savings to $250 million.

Sellek also said the campaign contacted Skorup for new numbers and, based on increased state transportation spending, believes the savings from prevailing wage will be closer to $300 million.

"As I said, we are citing the Mackinac Center on the $300 million number. That remains the same," Sellek said.

The Mackinac Center has not released a study reflecting that number.