Those promoting tax increase measures for the 2016 General Election ballot must be a little chagrined by the economic outlook report issued by the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) yesterday. Sure, they are happy that the state’s revenue outlook looks good, but talk of surpluses, a bulging treasury, and healthy reserve fund could wreck havoc with multiple campaigns seeking tax increases.

The LAO report assumes no new spending commitments. Under current circumstances, the LAO estimates reserves will increase to $11.5 billion at the end of 2016–17, up by $3.7 billion over 2015–16 levels.

Most notably for the coming tax debates, the report noted the approaching end date for the Proposition 30 taxes and projected under current circumstances of expected revenue growth there would be no “fiscal cliff” the state would face when the taxes end. One could argue that the LAO confirmed Gov. Jerry Brown’s argument when he promoted the temporary tax—we won’t need the revenue from the temporary tax when it expires because the economy will grow and provide revenues.

The LAO report offers cautions about potential downturns in the economy and what that might mean to the budget’s bottom line. The report postulated that the state is well past the midpoint of the present economic expansion, noting that the current 77 month expansion since July 2009 is already the fifth longest in state history.

But, even if an economic downturn is coming, the LAO doesn’t figure it will happen soon. One subhead in the report read: Bright 2016-17 Budget Outlook. And, here’s the point: the proposed tax initiatives, if they qualify, would be on the ballot during those bright days.

In the world of real politics, voters will hear about the surplus and the full treasury and wonder why taxes have to be raised.

The LAO did highlight one issue that could change budget predictions that may have already come to pass. In the report, the analyst said if two “key pension boards lower their assumptions concerning future investment returns, state contributions to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and CalSTRS could be billions of dollars higher than our main scenario estimates by 2019–20.”

Yesterday, the CalPERS board voted to lower the investment return assumptions potentially putting taxpayers on the hook for larger payouts from state and local governments. However, those taxpayer obligations would occur over time and probably will have little impact on voter decisions one year from now.

The idea of a healthy reserve undercutting tax increase efforts was noted early on when the first noises about extending Prop 30 were heard. Senator Mark Leno in May 2014 said at a rally “If we have $10 billion in reserve, how do we go to the voters in two or three years and say we have to extend their (Prop. 30) tax increase?”

Time to answer that question.