<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC ARIZONA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC COLORADO MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC MICHIGAN MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC MINNESOTA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC TEXAS MUNICIPALS FUND
SUPPLEMENT TO
PROSPECTUS
DATED
DECEMBER 1, 1995
Effective February 1, 1996, the Funds listed above are no longer offered
pursuant to the attached Prospectus.
<PAGE>
January 29, 1996 C-TFC12/1PS
EV CLASSIC ARIZONA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC COLORADO MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC MICHIGAN MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC MINNESOTA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV CLASSIC TEXAS MUNICIPALS FUND
SUPPLEMENT TO
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DATED
DECEMBER 1, 1995
Effective February 1, 1996, the Funds listed above are no longer offered
pursuant to the attached Statement of Additional Information.
January 29, 1996
<PAGE>
EV TRADITIONAL CONNECTICUT MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL NEW JERSEY MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL PENNSYLVANIA MUNICIPALS FUND
SUPPLEMENT TO PROSPECTUS
DATED DECEMBER 1, 1995
EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 1996, THE FOLLOWING FUNDS ARE OFFERED PURSUANT TO
THE ATTACHED PROSPECTUS:
EV TRADITIONAL ARIZONA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL COLORADO MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL MICHIGAN MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL MINNESOTA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL TEXAS MUNICIPALS FUND
Each of these Funds was formerly known as "EV Classic [State Name]
Municipals Fund".
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO "SHAREHOLDER AND FUND EXPENSES":
ANNUAL FUND AND ALLOCATED PORTFOLIO OPERATING EXPENSES (as a
percentage of average daily net assets)
--------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO MICHIGAN MINNESOTA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND FUND
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Investment Adviser Fee (after any applicable
expense reduction) 0.42% 0.13% 0.44% 0.37% 0.00%
Rule 12b-1 Service Fees (Service Plan) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
Other Expenses (after expense reduction) 0.23 0.18 0.30 0.15 0.06
---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Total Operating Expenses (after reductions) 0.80% 0.46% 0.89% 0.67% 0.21%
==== ==== ==== ==== ====
EXAMPLE
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An investor would pay the following maximum initial sales charge and expenses on a $1,000 investment, assuming (a) 5%
annual return and (b) redemption at the end of each period:
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO MICHIGAN MINNESOTA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND FUND
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
1 Year $ 45 $42 $ 46 $ 44 $40
3 Years 62 52 65 58 44
5 Years 80 62 85 73 49
10 Years 133 93 143 118 63
</TABLE>
NOTES:
The table and Example summarize the aggregate expenses of the Funds and the
Portfolios and are designed to help investors understand the costs and expenses
they will bear, directly or indirectly, by investing in a Fund. Information for
each Fund is based on its expenses for the most recent fiscal year, except that
Service Plan Fees are estimated for the fiscal year ending July 31, 1996
(assuming the Service Plan in effect on February 1, 1996). Absent a fee
reduction and/or an expense allocation, expenses of the following Funds would
have been the following percentage of average daily net assets: Arizona Fund
Other Expenses and Total Operating Expenses would have been 0.84% and 1.41%,
respectively; Colorado Fund Investment Adviser Fee, Other Expenses and Total
Operating Expenses would have been 0.28%, 0.95% and 1.38%, respectively;
Michigan Fund Other Expenses and Total Operating Expenses would have been 0.53%
and 1.12%, respectively; Minnesota Fund Other Expenses and Total Operating
Expenses would have been 0.66% and 1.18%, respectively; and Texas Fund
Investment Adviser Fee, Other Expenses and Total Operating Expenses would have
been 0.21%, 2.17% and 2.53%, respectively.
<PAGE>
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO "THE FUNDS" FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS'':
<TABLE>
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
YEAR ENDED JULY 31,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARIZONA FUND COLORADO FUND MICHIGAN FUND
------------------------------- ------------------------------- -------------------------------
1995 1994<F1> 1995 1994<F1> 1995 1994<F1>
---- ----- ---- ----- ---- -----
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NET ASSET VALUE, beginning
of year $ 9.390 $10.000 $ 9.180 $10.000 $ 9.220 $10.000
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS:
Net investment income $ 0.432 $ 0.253 $ 0.450 $ 0.256 $ 0.419 $ 0.261
Net realized and
unrealized gain (loss)
on investments 0.142 (0.563) 0.062<F3> (0.761) 0.063 (0.733)
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
Total income (loss) from
operations $ 0.574 $(0.310) $ 0.512 $(0.505) $ 0.482 $(0.472)
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
LESS DISTRIBUTIONS:
From net investment income $(0.432) $(0.253) $(0.450) $(0.256) $(0.419) $(0.261)
In excess of net
investment income (0.022) (0.047) (0.012) (0.059) (0.023) (0.047)
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
Total distributions $(0.454) $(0.300) $(0.462) $(0.315) $(0.442) $ (0.308)
------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
NET ASSET VALUE, end of year $ 9.510 $ 9.390 $ 9.230 $ 9.180 $ 9.260 $ 9.220
======= ======= ======= ======= ======= =======
TOTAL RETURN<F4> 6.44% (3.23)% 5.89% (5.22)% 5.52% (4.88)%
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA**:
Net assets, end of period
(000 omitted) $ 2,465 $ 2,412 $ 1,971 $ 2,342 $ 4,475 $ 6,366
Ratio of net expenses to
average daily net assets<F5> 1.60% 1.75%<F2> 1.26% 1.38%<F2> 1.69% 1.69%<F2>
Ratio of net investment
income to average daily
net assets 4.73% 4.14%<F2> 5.04% 4.20%<F2> 4.70% 4.18%<F2>
**For the periods indicated, the operating expenses of the Funds and the Portfolios may reflect an allocation of expenses to
the Administrator and/or Investment Adviser. Had such actions not been taken, net investment income per share and the ratios
would have been:
NET INVESTMENT INCOME PER SHARE $ 0.376 $ 0.181 $ 0.368 $ 0.146 $ 0.398 $ 0.235
======= ======= ======= ======= ======= =======
RATIOS (As a percentage of
average daily net assets):
Expenses<F5> 2.21% 2.93%<F2> 2.18% 3.18%<F2> 1.92% 2.11%<F2>
Net investment income 4.12% 2.96%<F2> 4.12% 2.40%<F2> 4.47% 3.76%<F2>
YEAR ENDED JULY 31,
-----------------------------------------------------
MINNESOTA FUND TEXAS FUND
------------------------- -------------------------
1995 1994* 1995 1994*
---- ----- ---- -----
NET ASSET VALUE, beginning of year $ 9.370 $10.000 $ 9.230 $10.000
------- ------- ------- -------
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS:
Net investment income $ 0.440 $ 0.267 $ 0.455 $ 0.267
Net realized and unrealized gain
(loss) on investments (0.048)<F3> (0.582) (0.008) (0.709)
------- ------- ------- -------
Total income (loss) from operations $ 0.392 $(0.315) $ 0.447 $(0.442)
------- ------- ------- -------
LESS DISTRIBUTIONS:
From net investment income $(0.440) $(0.267) $(0.455) $(0.267)
In excess of net investment income (0.022) (0.048) (0.032) (0.061)
------- ------- ------- -------
Total distributions $(0.462) $(0.315) $(0.487) $(0.328)
------- ------- ------- -------
NET ASSET VALUE, end of year $ 9.300 $ 9.370 $ 9.190 $ 9.230
======= ======= ======= =======
TOTAL RETURN<F4> 4.45% (3.29)% 5.16% (4.61)%
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA**:
Net assets, end of period (000 omitted) $ 3,688 $ 4,952 $ 469 $ 1,147
Ratio of net expenses to average
daily net assets<F5> 1.47% 1.51%<F2> 1.01% 1.08%<F2>
Ratio of net investment income
to average daily net assets 4.84% 4.33%<F2> 5.25% 4.53%<F2>
**For the periods indicated, the operating expenses of the Funds and the Portfolios may reflect an allocation of expenses to the
Administrator and/or Investment Adviser. Had such actions not been taken, net investment income per share and the ratios would
have been:
NET INVESTMENT INCOME
PER SHARE $ 0.394 $ 0.209 $ 0.254 $ 0.024
======= ======= ======= =======
RATIOS (As a percentage of average
daily net assets):
Expenses<F5> 1.98% 2.45%<F2> 3.33% 5.20%<F2>
Net investment income 4.33% 3.38%<F2> 2.93% 0.41%<F2>
Footnotes:
<FN>
<F1> For the Arizona, Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota and Texas Funds, the Financial Highlights are for the period from the start of
business, December 13, 1993, December 10, 1993, December 7, 1993, December 9, 1993 and December 8, 1993, respectively, to
July 31, 1994.
<F2> Annualized.
<F3> The per share amount is not in accord with the net realized and unrealized gain (loss) for the period because of the timing
of sales of Fund shares and the amount of the per share realized and unrealized gains and losses at such time.
<F4> Total return is calculated assuming a purchase at the net asset value on the first day and a sale at the net asset value on
the last day of each period reported. Dividends and distributions, if any, are assumed to be reinvested at the net asset
value on the payable date. Total return is computed on a non-annualized basis.
<F5> Includes the Fund's share of its corresponding Portfolio's allocated expenses.
<F6> Prior to February 1, 1996, the Arizona, Colorado, Michigan, Minnesota and Texas Funds made distribution fee payments pursuant
to a Distribution Plan. See "Service Plans."
</TABLE>
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO "THE FUNDS' INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES":
EV TRADITIONAL ARIZONA MUNICIPALS FUND (the "Arizona Fund") seeks to
provide current income exempt from regular federal income tax and Arizona
State personal income taxes. The Arizona Fund seeks to meet its objective by
investing its assets in the Arizona Municipals Portfolio (the "Arizona
Portfolio").
EV TRADITIONAL COLORADO MUNICIPALS FUND (the "Colorado Fund") seeks to
provide current income exempt from regular federal income tax and Colorado
State personal income taxes. The Colorado Fund seeks to meet its objective by
investing its assets in the Colorado Municipals Portfolio (the "Colorado
Portfolio").
EV TRADITIONAL MICHIGAN MUNICIPALS FUND (the "Michigan Fund") seeks to
provide current income exempt from regular federal income tax and Michigan
State and City income and single business taxes in the form of an investment
exempt from Michigan intangibles tax. The Michigan Fund seeks to meet its
objective by investing its assets in the Michigan Municipals Portfolio (the
"Michigan Portfolio").
EV TRADITIONAL MINNESOTA MUNICIPALS FUND (the "Minnesota Fund") seeks to
provide current income exempt from regular federal income tax and regular
Minnesota State personal income taxes. The Minnesota Fund seeks to meet its
objective by investing its assets in the Minnesota Municipals Portfolio (the
"Minnesota Portfolio").
EV TRADITIONAL TEXAS MUNICIPALS FUND (the "Texas Fund") seeks to provide
current income exempt from regular federal income taxes. The Texas Fund seeks
to meet its objective by investing its assets in the Texas Municipals
Portfolio (the "Texas Portfolio"). The State of Texas does not impose a State
income tax on individuals.
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO "HOW THE FUNDS AND THE PORTFOLIOS INVEST THEIR
ASSETS":
At least 75% of the net assets of the Colorado Portfolio and Texas
Portfolio, and at least 70% of the net assets of the Arizona Portfolio,
Michigan Portfolio and Minnesota Portfolio will normally be invested in
obligations rated at least investment grade at the time of investment. The
Minnesota Portfolio intends to invest its assets so as to comply with the
requirement that, in order for exempt interest dividends that are derived from
interest income from specified Minnesota sources to be exempt from regular
Minnesota State personal income taxes, 95% or more of the exempt interest
dividends that are paid to all shareholders by the Minnesota Fund must be
derived from such specified Minnesota sources.
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO "HOW THE FUNDS AND THE PORTFOLIOS INVEST THEIR
ASSETS - MUNICIPAL OBLIGATIONS":
As at July 31, 1995, the Portfolios had invested in obligations subject to
the federal alternative minimum tax as follows (as a percentage of net
assets): Arizona Portfolio (5.2%); Colorado Portfolio (9.3%); Michigan
Portfolio (5.6%); Minnesota Portfolio (14.3%); and Texas Portfolio (19.5%). At
July 31, 1995, the Portfolios limited their investment in obligations subject
to the federal alternative minimum tax (and, in the case of the Minnesota
Portfolio, the Minnesota alternative minimum tax) to not more than 20% of net
assets. The Portfolios are no longer subject to such limitation. For corporate
shareholders of the Minnesota Fund, exempt interest dividends attributable to
interest on all municipal obligations (whenever issued) eligible for exemption
from regular Minnesota State personal income taxes are included in taxable
income and in alternative minimum taxable income for purposes of determining
the Minnesota franchise tax imposed on corporations subject to Minnesota
taxation.
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO "MANAGEMENT OF THE FUNDS AND THE PORTFOLIOS" AND
REFLECTS (I) THE ADVISORY FEES PAID FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JULY 31, 1995 BY
THE ARIZONA, COLORADO, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA AND TEXAS PORTFOLIOS AS AN
ANNUALIZED PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE DAILY NET ASSETS AND (II) THE PORTFOLIO
MANAGERS OF SUCH PORTFOLIOS:
NET ASSETS AS OF
PORTFOLIO JULY 31, 1995 ADVISORY FEE
------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona $144,521,015 0.42%
Colorado 46,077,166 0.28%(1)
Michigan 191,262,981 0.44%
Minnesota 82,967,696 0.37%
Texas 28,227,021 0.21%(2)
(1) To enhance the net income of the Colorado Portfolio, BMR made a reduction
of its advisory fee in the amount of $69,064.
(2) To enhance the net income of the Texas Portfolio, BMR made a reduction of
its advisory fee in the full amount of such fee and BMR was allocated
$18,606 of expenses related to the operation of such Portfolio.
Nicole Anderes has acted as the portfolio manager of the Texas Portfolio
since December 1, 1995. She joined Eaton Vance and BMR as a Vice President in
January 1994. Prior to joining Eaton Vance, she was a Vice President and
portfolio manager at Lazard Freres Asset Management (1992-1994) and a Vice
President and Manager -- Municipal Research at Roosevelt & Cross (1978-1992).
Timothy T. Browse has acted as the portfolio manager of the Michigan
Portolio since it commenced operations. He has been a Vice President of Eaton
Vance and of BMR since 1993 and an employee of Eaton Vance since 1992. Prior
to joining Eaton Vance, he was a municipal bond trader at Fidelity Management
& Research Company (1987- 1992).
Cynthia J. Clemson has acted as the portfolio manager of the Arizona
Portfolio since January 1, 1994. Ms. Clemson has been a Vice President of
Eaton Vance and BMR since 1993 and an employee of Eaton Vance since 1985.
David C. Reilly has acted as the portfolio manager of the Minnesota and
Colorado Portfolios since December 1, 1995. He has been a Vice President of
Eaton Vance since 1991 and of BMR since 1992. Prior to joining Eaton Vance, he
was a Vice President and a municipal bond analyst at Scudder, Stevens & Clark
(1984-1991).
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO "SERVICE PLANS":
Prior to February 1, 1996, the Arizona Fund, Colorado Fund, Michigan Fund,
Minesota Fund and Texas Fund made sales commission and distribution fee
payments pursuant to a Distribution Plan. During the fiscal year ended July
31, 1995, each such Fund paid or accrued sales commissions under that
Distribution Plan equivalent to .75% (annualized) of such Fund's average daily
net assets. Each such Fund also paid or accrued service fees under that
Distribution Plan equivalent to 0.20% (annualized) of such Fund's average
daily net assets for such period.
THE FOLLOWING REPLACES THE LAST THREE PARAGRAPHS OF "HOW TO REDEEM FUND
SHARES":
If shares have been purchased at net asset value with no initial sales
charge by virtue of the purchase having been in the amount of $1 million or
more and are redeemed within 12 months of purchase, a CDSC of 0.50% will be
imposed on such redemption. For the Connecticut Fund, New Jersey Fund and
Pennsylvania Fund such purchases made before March 27, 1995 will be subject to
a CDSC of 1% in the event of certain redemptions made within 18 months of
purchase. In addition, certain shares of the Arizona Fund, Colorado Fund,
Michigan Fund, Minnesota Fund and Texas Fund purchased prior to February 1,
1996 and redeemed within the first year of their purchase (except shares
acquired through the reinvestment of distributions) generally will be subject
to a CDSC equal to 1% of the net asset value of redeemed shares. The CDSC will
be retained by the Principal Underwriter. The CDSC will be imposed on an
amount equal to the lesser of the current market value or the original
purchase price of the shares redeemed. Accordingly, no CDSC will be imposed on
increases in account value above the initial purchase price, including any
distributions that have been reinvested in additional shares. In determining
whether a CDSC is applicable to a redemption, the calculation will be made in
a manner that results in the lowest possible rate being charged. It will be
assumed that redemptions are made first from any shares in the shareholder's
account that are not subject to a CDSC.
The CDSC is waived for redemptions involving certain liquidation, merger or
acquisition transactions involving other investment companies. If a
shareholder reinvests redemption proceeds within a 60- day period and in
accordance with the conditions set forth under "Eaton Vance Shareholder
Services -- Reinvestment Privilege," the shareholder's account will be
credited with the amount of any CDSC paid on such redeemed shares. In
addition, the CDSC applicable to shares of the Arizona Fund, Colorado Fund,
Michigan Fund, Minnesota Fund and Texas Fund purchased prior to February 1,
1996 will be waived for shares redeemed (1) pursuant to a Withdrawal Plan (see
"Eaton Vance Shareholder Services"), (2) as part of a distribution from a
retirement plan qualified under Section 401, 403(b) or 457 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended or (3) as part of a minimum required
distribution from other tax-sheltered retirement plans.
THE FOLLOWING IS ADDED TO THE APPENDIX:
ARIZONA. Arizona's economy is primarily based on the service, high-tech
manufacturing, construction and tourism industries, as well as the military.
The State experienced rapid economic and population growth in the 1980s, which
has slowed somewhat in the 1990s. The problems associated with such growth
(air quality, transportation and public infrastructure) continue to be
addressed by the State legislature. The State's unemployment rate in June 1995
was 5.1%, below the national rate of 5.6%.
The State's ability to raise revenues is limited by Constitutional and
legislative restrictions on property tax increases. There is also a limit on
annual spending. The State does not issue general obligation bonds, but relies
on pay-as-you-go capital outlays, revenue bonds and certificates of
participation to finance projects. Each of these projects is individually
rated based on its specific creditworthiness.
ARIZONA TAXES. Based upon the advice of Arizona tax counsel, the management
of the Fund believes that under Arizona law, dividends paid by the Fund will
be exempt from Arizona income tax imposed on individuals, corporations and
estates and trusts that are subject to Arizona taxation to the extent such
dividends are excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes and
are derived from interest payments on Arizona obligations. In addition,
dividends paid by the Fund will be exempt from Arizona income tax imposed on
such persons, though included in gross income for federal income tax purposes,
to the extent such dividends are derived from interest payments on direct
obligations of the United States. Other distributions from the Fund, including
distributions derived from net short-term and long-term capital gains, are
generally not exempt from Arizona income tax.
Interest or indebtedness and other related expenses which are incurred or
continued by a shareholder to purchase or carry shares of the Fund generally
will not be deductible for Arizona income tax purposes.
COLORADO. Colorado's economy began to improve in the late 1980s, recovering
from a recession largely caused by contractions in the energy, high technology
and construction industries. The recovery has been fueled, in part, by large
public construction projects, net in- migration, a healthy tourist economy,
and increases in the wholesale and retail trade sector and the general
services sector. Momentum is sufficient that the Office of State Planning and
Budgeting has pronounced that Colorado's "slower growth pattern mimics that of
the United States, although it is not as severe as the nation's", even though
most of the large public works projects are completed and the boom in net
migration begins to ease. Employment in the service and trade industries
represents approximately 54.4% of the State's nonagricultural wage and salary
jobs, and government employment represents approximately 15.9%. Manufacturing
represents only 10.8% and, while total jobs in the sector is increasing,
manufacturing is slowly falling as a percentage of total employment, due in
part to a concentration in defense-related production. Colorado's unemployment
rate was 3.7% in August 1995, below the national rate of 5.6%. Colorado added
41,000 jobs in the twelve months ended August 1995, a 2.3% increase from the
prior year. There is no State general obligation debt outstanding.
COLORADO TAXES. In the opinion of Kutak Rock, special Colorado tax counsel
to the Fund, provided that the Fund qualifies as a regulated investment
company under the Code, and the Portfolio is treated as a partnership for
federal income tax purposes, individuals, trusts, estates, and corporations
who are holders of the Fund and who are subject to the Colorado income tax
will not be subject to Colorado tax on Fund dividends to the extent that: (a)
such dividends qualify as exempt-interest dividends of a regulated investment
company under Section 852(b)(5) of the Code and are derived from interest
received by the Fund on obligations of Colorado or any of its political
subdivisions issued on or after May 1, 1980 or (b) obligations of the United
States or its possessions to the extent included in federal taxable income. To
the extent that Fund distributions are attributable to sources not described
in the preceding sentences, such as long or short-term capital gains, such
distributions will not be exempt from Colorado income tax. There are no
municipal income taxes in Colorado. As intangibles, shares in the Fund will be
exempt from Colorado property taxes.
MICHIGAN. Michigan has long had a large representation in and is dominated
by the automobile industry and related industries and tends to be more
vulnerable to economic cycles than other states and the nation as a whole. As
of August, 1995 Michigan's unemployment rate was 5.1%, as compared to the
national rate of 5.6%. In March, 1994, Michigan voters approved changes to the
tax system resulting in, among other things, an increase in the sales tax
rate, a reduction in the income tax rate and the creation of a statewide
property tax.
Michigan's general obligation debt is rated A1, AA and AA, by Moody's, S&P
and Fitch, respectively.
MICHIGAN TAXES. The Michigan Fund has received an opinion from Butzel Long,
special Michigan tax counsel to the Michigan Fund, to the effect that
shareholders of the Michigan Fund who are subject to the Michigan state income
tax, municipal income tax or single business tax will not be subject to such
taxes on their Michigan Fund dividends to the extent that such distributions
are exempt-interest dividends for federal income tax purposes and are
attributable to interest on obligations held by the Michigan Portfolio and
allocated to the Michigan Fund which is exempt from regular federal income
tax, is not a tax preference item under the federal alternative minimum tax
and is exempt from Michigan State and City income taxes, Michigan single
business tax and in the form of an investment exempt from the Michigan
intangibles tax ("Michigan tax-exempt obligations"). Other distributions with
respect to shares of the Michigan Fund including, but not limited to, long or
short-term capital gains, will be subject to the Michigan income tax or single
business tax and may be subject to the city income taxes imposed by certain
Michigan cities. The opinion also provides that shares of the Michigan Fund
will be exempt from the Michigan intangibles tax to the extent the Michigan
Portfolio's assets consist of Michigan tax-exempt obligations and any other
securities or obligations that are exempt from the Michigan intangibles tax.
MINNESOTA. Minnesota relies heavily on a progressive individual income tax
and a retail sales tax for revenue, which results in a fiscal system unusually
sensitive to economic conditions. Economic and State fiscal conditions have
improved. As of August 1995, the State unadjusted unemployment rate was 2.6%
compared with a national rate of 5.6%. Unaudited information indicates that
the State ended fiscal year 1995 with a General Fund balance of $921 million.
The State's general obligation bonds are rated Aa1, AA+ and AAA, by
Moody's, S&P and Fitch, respectively. In March 1993, S&P revised the outlook
on Minnesota debt from Negative to Stable.
MINNESOTA TAXES. In the opinion of Faegre & Benson, special Minnesota tax
counsel to the Fund, provided that the Fund qualifies as a "regulated
investment company" under the Code and subject to the discussion in the
paragraph below, exempt-interest dividends paid by the Fund will be exempt
from the regular Minnesota personal income tax imposed on individuals, estates
and trusts that are subject to Minnesota taxation to the extent that such
dividends qualify as exempt-interest dividends of a regulated investment
company under section 852(b)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code which are derived
from interest income on tax-exempt obligations of Minnesota, or its political
or governmental subdivisions, municipalities, governmental agencies or
instrumentalities ("Minnesota Sources"); provided, however, such exemption
from the regular Minnesota personal income tax is available only if the
portion of the exempt-interest dividends from such Minnesota Sources that is
paid to all shareholders represents 95% or more of the exempt-interest
dividends that are paid by the Fund. For this purpose, provided that the
Portfolio is taxed federally as a partnership and not as a corporation, the
Fund will be treated as owning its proportionate share of the assets of the
Portfolio and the income derived from such assets. The Fund and the Portfolio
intend to invest their respective assets so that each will meet the 95% test.
However, if the 95% test is not met, all exempt-interest dividends that are
paid by the Fund will be subject to the regular Minnesota personal income tax.
Even if the 95% test is met, to the extent that exempt-interest dividends paid
by the Fund are not derived from the Minnesota Sources referred to in the
first sentence of this paragraph, they will be subject to the regular
Minnesota personal income tax. Other distributions of the Fund, including
distributions derived from net short-term and long-term capital gains, are
generally not exempt from the regular Minnesota personal income tax imposed on
individuals, estates and trusts.
Legislation enacted in 1995 provides that it is the intent of the Minnesota
legislature that interest income on obligations of Minnesota governmental
units, including obligations of the Minnesota Sources described above, and
exempt-interest dividends that are derived from interest income on such
obligations, be included in the net income of individuals, estates, and trusts
for Minnesota income tax purposes if it is judicially determined that the
exemption by Minnesota of such interest or such exempt-interest dividends
unlawfully discriminates against interstate commerce because interest income
on obligations of governmental issuers located in other states, or
exempt-interest dividends derived from such obligations, is so included. This
provision applies to taxable years that begin during or after the calendar
year in which such judicial decision becomes final, regardless of the date on
which the obligations were issued, and other remedies apply for previous
taxable years. The United States Supreme Court recently denied certiorari in
an Ohio case which upheld an exemption for interest income on obligations of
Ohio governmental issuers, even though interest income on obligations of
non-Ohio governmental issuers was subject to tax. However, it cannot be
predicted whether a similar case will be brought in Minnesota or elsewhere, or
what the outcome of such case would be.
Minnesota imposes an alternative minimum tax on individuals, estates, and
trusts that is based, in part, on such taxpayers' federal alternative minimum
taxable income. Accordingly, exempt-interest dividends that constitute tax
preference items for purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax, even
though they are derived from the Minnesota Sources described in the paragraph
above will be included in the base upon which such Minnesota alternative
minimum tax is computed. In addition, the entire portion of exempt-interest
dividends that is derived from sources other than the Minnesota Sources
described above also is subject to the Minnesota alternative minimum tax
imposed on individuals, estates and trusts. Furthermore, should the 95% test
that is described above fail to be met, all of the exempt-interest dividends
that are paid by the Fund, including all of those derived from the Minnesota
Sources described above, will be subject to the Minnesota alternative minimum
tax imposed on such shareholders.
Distributions from the Fund will be included in taxable income and in
alternative minimum taxable income, for purposes of determining the Minnesota
franchise tax imposed on corporations subject to Minnesota taxation. Such
distributions may also be taken into account in certain cases in determining
the minimum fee that is imposed on corporations, S corporations, and
partnerships.
Interest on indebtedness which is incurred and continued by an individual,
a trust or an estate to purchase or carry shares of the Fund generally will
not be deductible for regular Minnesota personal income tax purposes or
Minnesota alternative minimum tax purposes.
TEXAS TAXES. Texas does not impose a state income tax on individuals. To
the extent that distributions from the Texas Fund are included in a corporate
shareholder's surplus, they will be subject to the Texas franchise tax that is
based on net worth.
January 29, 1996
T-C12/1PS
<PAGE>
EV TRADITIONAL CONNECTICUT MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL NEW JERSEY TRADITIONAL FUND
EV TRADITIONAL PENNSYLVANIA MUNICIPALS FUND
SUPPLEMENT TO STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DATE DECEMBER 1, 1995
EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 1996, THE FOLLOWING FUNDS ARE OFFERED PURSUANT TO THE
ATTACHED STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
EV TRADITIONAL ARIZONA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL COLORADO MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL MICHIGAN MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL MINNESOTA MUNICIPALS FUND
EV TRADITIONAL TEXAS MUNICIPALS FUND
The attached Part IIs for the foregoing Funds are added to this Statement
of Additional Information. The financial statements of the Funds (each formerly
an "EV Classic [State Name] Municipals Fund") are contained in the attached
annual report to shareholders.
January 29, 1996
<PAGE>
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART II
This Part II provides information about EV TRADITIONAL ARIZONA MUNICIPALS
FUND. The investment objective of the Fund is to provide current income exempt
from regular federal income tax and Arizona State personal income taxes. The
Fund currently seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing its
assets in the Arizona Municipals Portfolio (the "Portfolio").
RISKS OF CONCENTRATION
The following information as to certain Arizona considerations is given to
investors in view of the Portfolio's policy of concentrating its investments
in Arizona issuers. Such information supplements the information in the
Prospectus. It is derived from sources that are generally available to
investors and is believed to be accurate. Such information constitutes only a
brief summary, does not purport to be a complete description and is based on
information from official statements relating to securities offerings of
Arizona issuers. Neither the Trust nor the Portfolio has independently
verified this information.
The ability of Arizona and its political subdivisions to respond to the
ever-increasing burdens placed upon them by the growth of the 1980's has been
limited, in part, by Constitutional and legislative restrictions on property
tax increases and limitations on annual expenditure increases. Subject to
certain exceptions, the maximum amount of property taxes levied by any Arizona
county, city, town or community college district for their operations and
maintenance expenditures cannot exceed the amount levied in a preceding year
by more than two percent. Certain taxes are specifically exempt from this
limit, including taxes levied for debt service payments. Annual property tax
levies for the payment of general obligation bonded indebtedness are unlimited
as to rate or amount. However, there are Constitutional limitations on the
aggregate amount of general obligation bonded indebtedness an Arizona
municipality may incur, and these limitations could impede a municipality's
ability to respond to the needs of a fast-growing population for additional
public facilities and services.
Arizona State government general fund revenue growth in fiscal year 1994
exceeded projections, increasing 10.7% overall. The 10.8% increase in sales
tax revenue and the 9.3% increase in income tax revenue reflects the increased
economic growth in the State. With revenue growth outpacing an 8.8% increase
in expenditures, the State general fund ended fiscal year 1994 with a total
fund balance of $420.2 million. Fiscal year 1995 is expected to close with a
general fund balance of $115 million, and a budget stabilization ("rainy day"
fund) balance of approximately $203 million, with the two combined equal to
7.3% of total general fund expenditures.
The 1995 legislature enacted a $200 million income tax reduction package
and has committed to enact a $200 million property tax reduction package in
1997. In 1992, Arizona voters passed a measure that requires a two-thirds vote
of the legislature to increase State revenue. Accordingly, it will be more
difficult to reverse the current and planned tax reductions, which may
adversely affect State fund balances and fiscal conditions.
FEES AND EXPENSES
INVESTMENT ADVISER
As of July 31, 1995, the Portfolio had net assets of $144,521,015. For the
fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Portfolio paid BMR advisory fees of
$629,148 (equivalent to 0.42% of the Portfolio's average daily net assets for
such year). For the ten months ended July 31, 1994, the Portfolio paid BMR
advisory fees of $505,544 (equivalent to 0.41% (annualized) of the Portfolio's
average daily net assets for such period). For the period from the Portfolio's
start of business, February 1, 1993, to the fiscal year ended September 30,
1993, the Portfolio paid BMR advisory fees of $268,894 (equivalent to 0.39%
(annualized) of the Portfolio's average daily net assets for such period). The
Portfolio's Investment Advisory Agreement with BMR is dated October 13, 1992
and remains in effect until February 28, 1996. The Agreement may be continued
as described under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI.
ADMINISTRATOR
As stated under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI, the Administrator currently receives no compensation for providing
administrative services to the Fund. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995
and for the period from the start of business, December 13, 1993, to the
fiscal year ended July 31, 1994, $18,453 and $16,438, respectively, of the
Fund's operating expenses were allocated to the Administrator.
SERVICE PLAN
The Service Plan remains in effect until April 28, 1996 and may be
continued as described under "Service Plan" in Part I of this SAI. Prior to
February 1, 1996, the Fund made sales commission, distribution fee and service
fee payments pursuant to a Distribution Plan. During the fiscal year ended
July 31, 1995, the Principal Underwriter paid to Authorized Firms sales
commissions of $21,876 under that Plan on sales of Fund shares. During the
same period, the Fund paid sales commission payments under that Plan to the
Principal Underwriter aggregating $22,746. During such period, contingent
deferred sales charges ("CDSCs") aggregating approximately $600 were imposed
on early redeeming shareholders and paid to the Principal Underwriter. The
CDSCs and sales commissions paid to the Principal Underwriter reduced
Uncovered Distribution Charges. As at July 31, 1995, the outstanding Uncovered
Distribution Charges of the Principal Underwriter calculated under the
Distribution Plan amounted to approximately $421,000 (which amount was
equivalent to 17.1% of the Fund's net assets on such date). During the fiscal
year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid service fee payments under the
Distribution Plan aggregating $6,090, of which $5,854 was paid to Authorized
Firms and the balance of which was retained by the Principal Underwriter.
PRINCIPAL UNDERWRITER
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid the Principal
Underwriter $87.50 for repurchase transactions handled by the Principal
Underwriter (being $2.50 for each such transaction).
CUSTODIAN
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid IBT $4,972 and the
Portfolio paid IBT $65,302.
BROKERAGE
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the ten months ended July 31,
1994, and for the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to the
fiscal year ended September 30, 1993, the Portfolio paid no brokerage
commissions on portfolio transactions.
TRUSTEES
The fees and expenses of those Trustees of the Trust and of the Portfolio
who are not members of the Eaton Vance organization (the noninterested
Trustees) are paid by the Fund (and the other series of the Trust) and the
Portfolio, respectively. (The Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio who are
members of the Eaton Vance organization receive no compensation from the Fund
or the Portfolio.) During the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the
noninterested Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio received the following
compensation in their capacities as Trustees from the Fund and the Portfolio,
and, for the year ended September 30, 1995, earned the following compensation
in their capacities as Trustees of the funds in the Eaton Vance fund complex
(1):
AGGREGATE AGGREGATE TOTAL COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION COMPENSATION FROM TRUST AND
NAME FROM FUND FROM PORTFOLIO FUND COMPLEX
- ---- ------------ -------------- ------------------
Donald R. Dwight .......... $0 $1,692(2) $135,000(4)
Samuel L. Hayes, III ...... 0 1,736(3) 150,000(5)
Norton H. Reamer .......... 0 1,752 135,000
John L. Thorndike ......... 0 1,841 140,000
Jack L. Treynor ........... 0 1,784 140,000
- ----------
(1) The Eaton Vance fund complex consists of 211 registered investment
companies or series thereof.
(2) Includes $436 of deferred compensation.
(3) Includes $559 of deferred compensation.
(4) Includes $35,000 of deferred compensation.
(5) Includes $33,750 of deferred compensation.
ADDITIONAL OFFICER INFORMATION
In addition to the officers of the Portfolio listed under "Officers of the
Trust and the Portfolio" in Part I of this SAI, Cynthia J. Clemson (33) is a
Vice President of the Portfolio. Ms. Clemson has served as a Vice President of
the Portfolio since June 19, 1995. Ms. Clemson has been a Vice President of
BMR and Eaton Vance since 1993 and an employee of Eaton Vance since 1985. Ms.
Clemson is an officer of various investment companies managed by Eaton Vance
or BMR.
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
The table below indicates the cumulative and average annual total return
on a hypothetical investment of $1,000 in the Fund from July 25, 1991 through
July 31, 1995 and for the one year period ended July 31, 1995. The total
return for the period prior to the Fund's commencement of operations on
December 13, 1993 reflects the Portfolio's total return (or that of its
predecessor) adjusted to reflect any applicable Fund sales charge. The total
return for such prior period has not been adjusted to reflect the Fund's
service fees and certain other expenses. The performance reflects the Fund's
sales charge effective February 1, 1996.
VALUE OF A $1,000 INVESTMENT
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
TOTAL RETURN TOTAL RETURN
VALUE OF EXCLUDING SALES CHARGE INCLUDING SALES CHARGE
INVESTMENT INVESTMENT AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT ---------------------------- ---------------------------
PERIOD DATE INVESTMENT<F1> ON 7/31/95 CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED
- -------------------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Life of the Fund<F2> 7/25/91 $962.50 $1,291.13 34.14% 7.58% 29.11% 6.56%
1 Year Ended 7/31/95<F2> 7/31/94 $962.09 $1,024.04 6.44% 6.44% 2.45% 2.45%
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment return and principal value will fluctuate; shares, when
redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost.
- ----------
<FN>
<F1> Initial investment less the maximum sales charge of 3.75%. This sales charge is effective February 1, 1996. Prior thereto,
Fund shares redeemed within one year of their purchase are subject to a contingent deferred sales charge of 1%.
<F2> If a portion of the Portfolio's and/or the Fund's expenses had not been subsidized, the Fund would have had lower returns.
</TABLE>
For the thirty-day period ended July 31, 1995, the yield of the Fund was
4.35%. The yield required of a taxable security that would produce an after-
tax yield equivalent to that earned by the Fund of 4.35% would be 6.65%,
assuming a combined federal and State tax rate of 34.59%. If a portion of the
Fund's expenses had not been allocated to the Administrator, the Fund would
have had a lower yield.
The Fund's distribution rate (calculated on July 31, 1995 and based on the
Fund's monthly distribution paid July 24, 1995) was 4.45%, and the Fund's
effective distribution rate (calculated on the same date and based on the same
monthly distribution) was 4.55%. If a portion of the Fund's expenses had not
been allocated to the Administrator, the Fund would have had a lower
distribution rate and effective distribution rate.
See the Tax Equivalent Yield Table in this Part II for information
concerning applicable tax rates and income brackets.
CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES
As at December 29, 1995, the Trustees and officers of the Trust, as a
group, owned in the aggregate less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the
Fund. As of December 29, 1995, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.,
Jacksonville, FL and Southwest Securities, Dallas, TX were the record owners
of approximately 32.4% and 20.2% of the outstanding shares, which were held on
behalf of their customers who are the beneficial owners of such shares, and as
to which they had voting power under certain limited circumstances. In
addition, as of such date, Sherely F. Randall, Trustee, Sherely F. Randall Liv
Trust U/A dtd 8/9/94, Green Valley, AZ owned approximately 9.2% of the
outstanding shares of the Fund. To the knowledge of the Trust, no other person
owned of record or beneficially 5% or more of the Fund's outstanding shares as
of such date.
OTHER INFORMATION
The Trust, which is a Massachusetts business trust established in 1985,
was originally called Eaton Vance High Yield Municipals Trust. The Trust
changed its name to Eaton Vance Municipals Trust on January 7, 1991. The Fund
changed its name from EV Classic Arizona Tax Free Fund to EV Classic Arizona
Municipals Fund on December 1, 1995 and to EV Traditional Arizona Municipals
Fund on February 1, 1996.
TAX EQUIVALENT YIELD TABLE
The table below gives the approximate yield a taxable security must earn
at various income brackets to produce after-tax yields equivalent to those of
tax exempt bonds yielding from 4% to 7% under the regular federal income tax
and Arizona State income tax laws and tax rates applicable for 1996.
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
COMBINED A FEDERAL AND ARIZONA STATE
SINGLE RETURN JOINT RETURN FEDERAL AND TAX EXEMPT YIELD OF:
- -------------------------- -------------------- ARIZONA 4% 4.5% 5% 5.5% 6% 6.5% 7%
STATE TAX ---------------------------------------------------------------
(TAXABLE INCOME<F1>) BRACKET<F2> IS EQUIVALENT TO A FULLY TAXABLE YIELD OF:
- ------------------------------------------------ ---------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Up to $ 24,000 Up to $ 40,100 17.98% 4.88% 5.49% 6.10% 6.71% 7.31% 7.92% 8.53%
$ 24,001 - $ 58,150 $ 40,101 - $ 96,900 31.74 5.86 6.59 7.33 8.06 8.79 9.52 10.26
$ 58,151 - $121,300 $ 96,901 - $147,700 34.59 6.12 6.88 7.64 8.41 9.17 9.94 10.70
$121,301 - $263,750 $147,701 - $263,750 39.58 6.62 7.45 8.28 9.10 9.93 10.76 11.59
Over $263,750 Over $263,750 42.98 7.02 7.89 8.77 9.65 10.52 11.40 12.28
<F1> Net amount subject to federal and Arizona personal income tax after deductions and exemptions.
<F2> The combined federal and Arizona tax brackets are calculated using the highest Arizona tax rate within each bracket. Taxpayers
with taxable income within such brackets may have lower combined tax brackets and taxable equivalent yields than indicated
above. The combined tax brackets assume that Arizona taxes are itemized deductions for federal income tax purposes. Investors
who do not itemize deductions on their federal income tax return will have a higher combined bracket and higher taxable
equivalent yield than those indicated above. The applicable federal tax rates within the brackets are 15%, 28%, 31%, 36%
and 39.6%, over the same ranges of income.
</TABLE>
Note: The federal income tax portion of above-indicated combined income tax
brackets does not take into account the effect of a reduction in the
deductibility of itemized deductions (including Arizona State Income Taxes)
for taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950. The tax
brackets also do not show the effects of phaseout of personal exemptions for
single filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950 and joint
filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $176,950. The effective tax
brackets and equivalent taxable yields of such taxpayers will be higher than
those indicated above.
Yields shown are for illustration purposes only and are not meant to represent
the Fund's actual yield. No assurance can be given that the Fund will achieve
any specific tax exempt yield. While it is expected that a substantial portion
of the interest income distributed to Fund Shareholders will be exempt from
the regular federal income tax and Arizona personal income taxes, other income
received by the Portfolio and allocated to the Fund may be taxable. The table
does not take into account state or local taxes, if any, payable on Fund
distributions except for Arizona personal income taxes. It should also be
noted that the interest earned on certain "private activity bonds" issued
after August 7, 1986, while exempt from the regular federal income tax, is
treated as a tax preference item which could subject the recipient to the
federal alternative minimum tax. The illustrations assume that the federal
alternative minimum tax is not applicable and do not take into account any tax
credits that may be available.
The information set forth above is as of the date of this SAI. Subsequent tax
law changes could result in prospective or retroactive changes in the tax
brackets, tax rates, and tax equivalent yields set forth above. Investors
should consult their tax adviser for additional information.
<PAGE>
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART II
This Part II provides information about EV TRADITIONAL COLORADO MUNICIPALS
FUND. The investment objective of the Fund is to provide current income exempt
from regular federal income tax and Colorado State personal income taxes. The
Fund currently seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing its
assets in the Colorado Municipals Portfolio (the "Portfolio").
RISKS OF CONCENTRATION
The following information as to certain Colorado considerations is given
to investors in view of the Portfolio's policy of concentrating its
investments in Colorado issuers. Such information supplements the information
in the Prospectus. It is derived from sources that are generally available to
investors and is believed to be accurate. Such information constitutes only a
brief summary, does not purport to be a complete description and is based on
information from official statements relating to securities offerings of
Colorado issuers. Neither the Trust nor the Portfolio has independently
verified this information.
Large public works projects, a pickup in the housing sector and growth in
the trade and services industries led to moderate employment gains for the
State during the early 1990's. Certain areas of manufacturing, however, have
been adversely impacted by the prolonged U.S. downturn and by relatively heavy
reliance on defense contracts and military payroll.
The major revenue sources of the State are the individual income tax and
the general sales and use tax. Because of limitations contained in the State
constitution, the State of Colorado issues no general obligation bonds.
Several agencies and instrumentalities of State government, however, are
authorized by statute to issue bonds secured by revenues from specific
projects and activities or to enter into lease-purchase financings which are
subject to annual appropriation. Additionally, the State is authorized to
issue short-term revenue anticipation notes. To the extent the Portfolio holds
debt of local units of government whose revenues may rely in part on
distributions from the State, the fiscal health of the State will have an
indirect affect on the Portfolio. The State is required to have a balanced
budget each fiscal year. Therefore, in the event of a funding gap, the State
must cut expenditures and/or raise revenues. The latter is difficult,
especially since the passage of the TABOR Amendment (see below). Strong growth
in income tax and sales tax collections recently contributed to larger
increases in the unreserved fund balance than had been budgeted. In fiscal
year 1993-94, the State had revenue collections which exceeded expenditures by
$38 million. In fiscal year 1994-95, revenues exceeded expenditures by $94
million. The State will make a $74 million contribution to an emergency
reserve, leaving the general fund reserve at $276 million, or roughly 7.6% of
total annual appropriations. Such emergency reserve transfers are not foreseen
to be required in the next several years. Revenues for the 1995-96 fiscal year
are budgeted to increase 4% while expenditures will increase 6%.
There are approximately 1,800 units of local government in Colorado,
including counties, statutory cities and towns, home-rule cities and counties,
school districts and a variety of water, sewer and other special districts,
all with various constitutional and statutory authority to levy taxes and
incur indebtedness. The major sources of revenue for payment of indebtedness
are the ad valorem property tax, which presently is imposed and collected
solely at the local level, although the State is also authorized to levy the
tax, sales and use taxes, and revenue from special projects. Residential real
property is presently assessed at 10.36% of its actual value. All other
property is assessed at 29% of its actual value except producing mines and oil
and gas properties. Oil and gas properties are assessed at 87.5%.
A 1992 amendment to the State Constitution (the "TABOR Amendment")
restricts growth of State and local government spending to the rate of
inflation plus growth (as measured by population, school enrollment, or
construction depending on the government entity); and requires voter approval
of all new taxes or tax increases and the issuance of most types of debt.
Though the TABOR Amendment is not expected to have an immediate effect on the
credit quality of state and local governments, it will likely reduce the
financial flexibility of all levels of government in Colorado over time. In
particular, local governments dependent on taxes on residential property are
being squeezed between the TABOR Amendment requirements of voter approval for
increased mill levies and an earlier State Constitutional amendment which has
had the effect of lowering the assessment rate on residential property from
21% to 10.36% over the past 8 years. Younger or rapidly growing municipalities
with large infrastructure requirements may have particular difficulty finding
the revenues needed to finance their growth.
FEES AND EXPENSES
INVESTMENT ADVISER
As of July 31, 1995, the Portfolio had net assets of $46,077,166. For the
fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, absent a fee reduction, the Portfolio would
have paid BMR advisory fees of $128,496 (equivalent to 0.28% of the
Portfolio's average daily net assets for such year). To enhance the net income
of the Portfolio, BMR made a reduction of its advisory fee in the amount of
$69,064. For the ten months ended July 31, 1994, absent a fee reduction, the
Portfolio would have paid BMR advisory fees of $67,224 (equivalent to 0.23%
(annualized) of the Portfolio's average daily net assets for such period). To
enhance the net income of the Portfolio, BMR made a reduction of the full
amount of its advisory fee and BMR was allocated a portion of the expenses
related to the operation of the Portfolio in the amount of $31,504. For the
period from the Portfolio's start of business, February 1, 1993, to the fiscal
year ended September 30, 1993, absent a fee reduction, the Portfolio would
have paid BMR advisory fees of $15,122 (equivalent to 0.16% (annualized) of
the Portfolio's average daily net assets for such period). To enhance the net
income of the Portfolio, BMR made a reduction of the full amount of its
advisory fee and BMR was allocated a portion of expenses related to the
operation of the Portfolio in the amount of $12,114. The Portfolio's
Investment Advisory Agreement with BMR is dated October 13, 1992 and remains
in effect until February 28, 1996. The Agreement may be continued as described
under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this SAI.
ADMINISTRATOR
As stated under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI, the Administrator currently receives no compensation for providing
administrative services to the Fund. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995
and for the period from the start of business, December 10, 1993, to the
fiscal year ended July 31, 1994, $17,169 and $14,596, respectively, of the
Fund's operating expenses were allocated to the Administrator.
SERVICE PLAN
The Service Plan remains in effect until April 28, 1996 and may be
continued as described under "Service Plan" in Part I of this SAI. Prior to
February 1, 1996, the Fund made sales commission, distribution fee and service
fee payments pursuant to a Distribution Plan. During the fiscal year ended
July 31, 1995, the Principal Underwriter paid to Authorized Firms sales
commissions of $16,399 under that Plan on sales of Fund shares. During the
same period, the Fund paid sales commission payments under that Plan to the
Principal Underwriter aggregating $17,028. During such period, contingent
deferred sales charges ("CDSCs") aggregating approximately $200 were imposed
on early redeeming shareholders and paid to the Principal Underwriter. The
CDSCs and sales commissions paid to the Principal Underwriter reduced
Uncovered Distribution Charges. As at July 31, 1995, the outstanding Uncovered
Distribution Charges of the Principal Underwriter calculated under the
Distribution Plan amounted to approximately $286,000 (which amount was
equivalent to 14.5% of the Fund's net assets on such date). During the fiscal
year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid service fee payments under the
Distribution Plan aggregating $4,594, of which $4,346 was paid to Authorized
Firms and the balance of which was retained by the Principal Underwriter.
PRINCIPAL UNDERWRITER
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid the Principal
Underwriter $125 for repurchase transactions handled by the Principal
Underwriter (being $2.50 for each such transaction).
CUSTODIAN
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid IBT $4,950 and the
Portfolio paid IBT $16,604.
BROKERAGE
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the ten months ended July 31,
1994, and for the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to the
fiscal year ended September 30, 1993, the Portfolio paid no brokerage
commissions on portfolio transactions.
TRUSTEES
The fees and expenses of those Trustees of the Trust and of the Portfolio
who are not members of the Eaton Vance organization (the noninterested
Trustees) are paid by the Fund (and the other series of the Trust) and the
Portfolio, respectively. (The Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio who are
members of the Eaton Vance organization receive no compensation from the Fund
or the Portfolio.) During the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the
noninterested Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio received the following
compensation in their capacities as Trustees from the Fund and the Portfolio,
and, for the year ended September 30, 1995, earned the following compensation
in their capacities as Trustees of the funds in the Eaton Vance fund
complex(1):
AGGREGATE AGGREGATE TOTAL COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION COMPENSATION FROM TRUST AND
NAME FROM FUND FROM PORTFOLIO FUND COMPLEX
- ---- ------------ -------------- ------------------
Donald R. Dwight .......... $0 $333(2) $135,000(4)
Samuel L. Hayes, III ...... 0 322(3) 150,000(5)
Norton H. Reamer .......... 0 314 135,000
John L. Thorndike ......... 0 318 140,000
Jack L. Treynor ........... 0 343 140,000
- ----------
(1) The Eaton Vance fund complex consists of 211 registered investment
companies or series thereof.
(2) Includes $83 of deferred compensation.
(3) Includes $103 of deferred compensation.
(4) Includes $35,000 of deferred compensation.
(5) Includes $33,750 of deferred compensation.
ADDITIONAL OFFICER INFORMATION
In addition to the officers of the Portfolio listed under "Officers of the
Trust and the Portfolio" in Part I of this SAI, David C. Reilly (38) is a Vice
President of the Portfolio. Mr. Reilly has served as a Vice President of the
Portfolio since December 1, 1995. Mr. Reilly has been a Vice President of BMR
since 1992 and Eaton Vance since 1991 and an employee of Eaton Vance since
1991. Prior to joining Eaton Vance, he was a Vice President and a municipal
bond analyst at Scudder, Stevens & Clark (1984-1991). Mr. Reilly is an officer
of various investment companies managed by Eaton Vance or BMR.
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
The table below indicates the cumulative and average annual total return
on a hypothetical investment of $1,000 in the Fund from August 25, 1992
through July 31, 1995 and for the one year period ended July 31, 1995. The
total return for the period prior to the Fund's commencement of operations on
December 10, 1993 reflects the Portfolio's total return (or that of its
predecessor) adjusted to reflect any applicable Fund sales charge. The total
return for such prior period has not been adjusted to reflect the Fund's
service fees and certain other expenses. The performance reflects the Fund's
sales charge effective February 1, 1996.
VALUE OF A $1,000 INVESTMENT
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
TOTAL RETURN TOTAL RETURN
VALUE OF EXCLUDING SALES CHARGE INCLUDING SALES CHARGE
INVESTMENT INVESTMENT AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT ---------------------------- ---------------------------
PERIOD DATE INVESTMENT<F1> ON 7/31/95 CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED
- -------------------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Life of the Fund<F2> 8/25/92 $962.49 $1,130.44 17.45% 5.64% 13.05% 4.27%
1 Year Ended 7/31/95<F2> 7/31/94 $962.27 $1,018.93 5.89% 5.89% 1.92% 1.92%
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment return and principal value will fluctuate; shares, when
redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost.
- ----------
<FN>
<F1> Initial investment less the maximum sales charge of 3.75%. This sales charge is effective February 1, 1996. Prior thereto,
Fund shares redeemed within one year of their purchase are subject to a contingent deferred sales charge of 1%.
<F2> If a portion of the Portfolio's and/or the Fund's expenses had not been subsidized, the Fund would have had lower returns.
</TABLE>
For the thirty-day period ended July 31, 1995, the yield of the Fund was
4.65%. The yield required of a taxable security that would produce an after-
tax yield equivalent to that earned by the Fund of 4.65% would be 7.09%,
assuming a combined federal and State tax rate of 34.45%. If a portion of the
Portfolio's and the Fund's expenses had not been allocated to the Investment
Adviser and the Administrator, respectively, the Fund would have had a lower
yield.
The Fund's distribution rate (calculated on July 31, 1995 and based on the
Fund's monthly distribution paid July 24, 1995) was 4.62%, and the Fund's
effective distribution rate (calculated on the same date and based on the same
monthly distribution) was 4.72%. If a portion of the Portfolio's and the
Fund's expenses had not been allocated to the Investment Adviser and the
Administrator, respectively, the Fund would have had a lower distribution rate
and effective distribution rate.
See the Tax Equivalent Yield Table in this Part II for information
concerning applicable tax rates and income brackets.
CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES
As at December 29, 1995, the Trustees and officers of the Trust, as a
group, owned in the aggregate less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the
Fund. As of December 29, 1995, Donaldson Lufkin Jenrette Securities
Corporation Inc., Jersey City, NJ and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith,
Inc., Jacksonville, FL were the record owners of approximately 8.9% and 11.3%
of the outstanding shares, which were held on behalf of their customers who
are the beneficial owners of such shares, and as to which they had voting
power under certain limited circumstances. To the knowledge of the Trust, no
other person owned of record or beneficially 5% or more of the Fund's
outstanding shares as of such date.
OTHER INFORMATION
The Trust, which is a Massachusetts business trust established in 1985,
was originally called Eaton Vance High Yield Municipals Trust. The Trust
changed its name to Eaton Vance Municipals Trust on January 7, 1991. The Fund
changed its name from EV Classic Colorado Tax Free Fund to EV Classic Colorado
Municipals Fund on December 1, 1995 and to EV Traditional Colorado Municipals
Fund on February 1, 1996.
<PAGE>
TAX EQUIVALENT YIELD TABLE
The table below gives the approximate yield a taxable security must earn
at various income brackets to produce after-tax yields equivalent to those of
tax exempt bonds yielding from 4% to 7% under the regular federal income tax
and Colorado State income tax laws and tax rates applicable for 1995.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
A FEDERAL AND COLORADO STATE
COMBINED TAX EXEMPT YIELD OF:
SINGLE RETURN JOINT RETURN FEDERAL AND 4% 4.5% 5% 5.5% 6% 6.5% 7%
------------ ------------ CO STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------
(TAXABLE INCOME<F1>) TAX BRACKET<F2> IS EQUIVALENT TO A FULLY TAXABLE YIELD OF:
- ------------------------------------------------ ------ ---------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Up to $ 23,350 Up to $ 39,000 19.25% 4.95% 5.57% 6.19% 6.81% 7.43% 8.05% 8.67%
$ 23,351 - $ 56,550 $ 39,001 - $ 94,250 31.60 5.85 6.58 7.31 8.04 8.77 9.50 10.23
$ 56,551 - $117,950 $ 94,251 - $143,600 34.45 6.10 6.86 7.63 8.39 9.15 9.92 10.68
$117,951 - $256,500 $143,601 - $256,500 39.20 6.58 7.40 8.22 9.05 9.87 10.69 11.51
Over $256,500 Over $256,500 42.62 6.97 7.84 8.71 9.59 10.46 11.33 12.20
<FN>
<F1> Net amount subject to federal and Colorado personal income tax after deductions and exemptions.
<F2> The Colorado income tax rate is 5%. The combined tax rates assume that Colorado taxes are itemized deductions for federal
income tax purposes. Investors who do not itemize deductions on their federal income tax return will have a higher combined
bracket and higher taxable equivalent yield than those indicated above. The applicable federal tax rates within the
brackets are 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%, over the same ranges of income.
</TABLE>
Note: The federal income tax portion of above-indicated combined income tax
brackets does not take into account the effect of a reduction in the
deductibility of itemized deductions (including Colorado State income taxes)
for taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess $114,700. The tax brackets
also do not show the effects of phaseout of personal exemptions for single
filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $114,700 and joint filers with
adjusted gross income in excess of $172,050. The effective tax brackets and
equivalent taxable yields of such taxpayers will be higher than those
indicated above.
Yields shown are for illustration purposes only and are not meant to represent
the Fund's actual yield. No assurance can be given that the Fund will achieve
any specific tax exempt yield. While it is expected that the Portfolio will
invest principally in obligations, the interest from which is exempt from the
regular federal income tax and Colorado personal income taxes, other income
received by the Portfolio and allocated to the Fund may be taxable. The table
does not take into account state or local taxes, if any, payable on Fund
distributions except for Colorado personal income taxes. It should also be
noted that the interest earned on certain "private activity bonds" issued
after August 7, 1986, while exempt from the regular federal income tax, is
treated as a tax preference item which could subject the recipient to the
federal alternative minimum tax. The illustrations assume that the federal
alternative minimum tax is not applicable and do not take into account any tax
credits that may be available.
The information set forth above is as of the date of this SAI. Subsequent tax
law changes could result in prospective or retroactive changes in the tax
brackets, tax rates, and tax equivalent yields set forth above. Investors
should consult their tax adviser for additional information.
<PAGE>
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART II
This Part II provides information about EV TRADITIONAL MICHIGAN MUNICIPALS
FUND. The investment objective of the Fund is to provide current income exempt
from regular federal income tax and Michigan State and City income and single
business taxes in the form of an investment exempt from Michigan intangibles
tax. The Fund currently seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing
its assets in the Michigan Municipals Portfolio (the "Portfolio").
RISKS OF CONCENTRATION
The following information as to certain Michigan considerations is given
to investors in view of the Portfolio's policy of concentrating its
investments in Michigan issuers. Such information supplements the information
in the Prospectus. It is derived from sources that are generally available to
investors and is believed to be accurate. Such information constitutes only a
brief summary, does not purport to be a complete description and is based on
information from official statements relating to securities offerings of
Michigan issuers. Neither the Trust nor the Portfolio has independently
verified this information.
The State's economy is overly dependent on the manufacturing sector, more
specifically the auto industry. Manufacturing accounts for 23% of total
employment as compared to the national average of 17%. The dependency on
manufacturing makes the State economy overly susceptible to economic
downturns. For the first time since 1966, the unemployment rate was below the
national average. An improving economy and successful cost containment have
enabled the State to improve its financial position. For 1994, the Budget
Stabilization Fund was $779 million and is projected to reach $1.1 billion for
1995. The Governor has proposed reducing individual and business income taxes.
For 1996, revenues are estimated to grow 4.7% while expenditures will grow by
a similar rate.
In March, 1994, Michigan voters approved a change in the tax system. The
most significant provisions were an increase in the sales tax rate from 4% to
6%, a reduction in the income tax rate from 4.6% to 4.4% and the creation of a
statewide property tax. These changes are expected to provide sufficient
revenues to offset the elimination of property taxes for school district
operating purposes. There can be no assurance that school districts will
receive sufficient revenues to be able to service any limited tax bonds they
may have outstanding and which may be held by the Portfolio.
Under the State Constitution, the Legislature is prohibited from raising
taxes if doing so would cause total State revenues (except Federal aid) to
exceed 10% of State personal income. The only exceptions to this revenue limit
are a majority approval of a referendum question or a specific emergency
declared by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. However, this limit does not
apply to taxes imposed for the payment of principal and interest on bonds of
the State, if the bonds are approved by voters and authorized by a vote of
two-thirds of the members of each House of the Legislature. Local units of
government and local authorities are authorized to issue bonds and other
evidences of indebtedness in a variety of situations without the approval of
electors, but the ability of the obligor to levy taxes for the payment of such
obligations is subject to the foregoing limitations unless the obligations
were authorized before December 23, 1978 or approved by the electors. The
Constitution prohibits the State from reducing the proportion of total State
spending paid to all local units of government, taken as a group, below that
proportion in effect in the 1978-79 fiscal year. The State may not mandate new
or increased levels of services to be provided by local units without making
appropriations to cover any increased costs.
Under the State Constitution, the total amount of general ad valorem taxes
imposed on taxable property in any year cannot exceed certain millage
limitations specified by the Constitution, statute or charter. The
Constitution prohibits local units of government from levying any tax not
authorized by law or charter, or from increasing the rate of an existing tax
above the rate authorized by law or charter. The Constitution also contains
millage reduction provisions. Under such provisions, should the value of
taxable property (exclusive of new construction and improvements) increase at
a percentage greater than the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index,
the maximum authorized tax rate would be reduced by a factor which would
result in the same maximum potential tax revenues to the local taxing unit as
if the valuation of taxable property (less new construction and improvements)
had grown only at the Consumer Price Index rate instead of at the higher
actual growth rate. Thus, if taxable property values rise faster than consumer
prices, the maximum authorized tax rate would be increased at the Consumer
Price Index rate. Conversely, if taxable property values rise slower than
consumer prices, tax rates may be raised accordingly, but never higher than
the rate authorized on December 23, 1978, without elector approval.
The ability of the State to pay the principal and interest on its general
obligation bonds may be affected by the limitations described above.
Similarly, the ability of local units to levy taxes to pay the principal of
and interest on their general obligations is subject to the constitutional,
statutory and charter limits described below.
FEES AND EXPENSES
INVESTMENT ADVISER
As of July 31, 1995, the Portfolio had net assets of $191,262,981. For the
fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Portfolio paid BMR advisory fees of
$856,258 (equivalent to 0.44% of the Portfolio's average daily net assets for
such year). For the ten months ended July 31, 1994, the Portfolio paid BMR
advisory fees of $721,041 (equivalent to 0.43% (annualized) of the Portfolio's
average daily net assets for such period). For the period from the Portfolio's
start of business, February 1, 1993, to the fiscal year ended September 30,
1993, the Portfolio paid BMR advisory fees of $443,391 (equivalent to 0.42%
(annualized) of the Portfolio's average daily net assets for such period). The
Portfolio's Investment Advisory Agreement with BMR is dated October 13, 1992
and remains in effect until February 28, 1996. The Agreement may be continued
as described under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI.
ADMINISTRATOR
As stated under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI, the Administrator currently receives no compensation for providing
administrative services to the Fund. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995,
and for the period from the start of business, December 7, 1993, to the fiscal
year ended July 31, 1994, $12,579 and $13,862, respectively, of the Fund's
operating expenses were allocated to the Administrator.
SERVICE PLAN
The Service Plan remains in effect until April 28, 1996 and may be
continued as described under "Service Plan" in Part I of this SAI. Prior to
February 1, 1996, the Fund made sales commission, distribution fee and service
fee payments pursuant to a Distribution Plan. During the fiscal year ended
July 31, 1995, the Principal Underwriter paid to Authorized Firms sales
commissions of $40,804 under that Plan on sales of Fund shares. During the
same period, the Fund paid sales commission payments under that Plan to the
Principal Underwriter aggregating $41,523. During such period, contingent
deferred sales charges ("CDSCs") aggregating approximately $50 were imposed on
early redeeming shareholders and paid to the Principal Underwriter. The CDSCs
and sales commissions paid to the Principal Underwriter reduced Uncovered
Distribution Charges. As at July 31, 1995, the outstanding Uncovered
Distribution Charges of the Principal Underwriter calculated under the
Distribution Plan amounted to approximately $527,000 (which amount was
equivalent to 11.8% of the Fund's net assets on such date). During the fiscal
year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid service fee payments under the
Distribution Plan aggregating $11,008, of which $10,877 was paid to Authorized
Firms and the balance of which was retained by the Principal Underwriter.
PRINCIPAL UNDERWRITER
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid the Principal
Underwriter $177.50 for repurchase transactions handled by the Principal
Underwriter (being $2.50 for each such transaction).
CUSTODIAN
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid IBT $3,955 and the
Portfolio paid IBT $1,944.
BROKERAGE
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the ten months ended July 31,
1994, and for the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to the
fiscal year ended September 30, 1993, the Portfolio paid no brokerage
commissions on portfolio transactions.
TRUSTEES
The fees and expenses of those Trustees of the Trust and of the Portfolio
who are not members of the Eaton Vance organization (the noninterested
Trustees) are paid by the Fund (and the other series of the Trust) and the
Portfolio, respectively. (The Trustees of the Trust and of the Portfolio who
are members of the Eaton Vance organization receive no compensation from the
Fund or the Portfolio.) During the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the
noninterested Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio received the following
compensation in their capacities as Trustees from the Fund and the Portfolio,
and, for the year ended September 30, 1995, earned the following compensation
in their capacities as Trustees of the funds in the Eaton Vance fund complex
(1):
AGGREGATE AGGREGATE TOTAL COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION COMPENSATION FROM TRUST AND
NAME FROM FUND FROM PORTFOLIO FUND COMPLEX
- ---- ------------ -------------- ------------------
Donald R. Dwight ......... $33 $2,198(2) $135,000(4)
Samuel L. Hayes, III ..... 32 2,219(3) 150,000(5)
Norton H. Reamer ......... 31 2,229 135,000
John L. Thorndike ........ 32 2,325 140,000
Jack L. Treynor .......... 34 2,300 140,000
- ----------
(1) The Eaton Vance fund complex consists of 211 registered investment
companies or series thereof.
(2) Includes $525 of deferred compensation.
(3) Includes $682 of deferred compensation.
(4) Includes $35,000 of deferred compensation.
(5) Includes $33,750 of deferred compensation.
ADDITIONAL OFFICER INFORMATION
In addition to the officers of the Portfolio listed under "Officers of the
Trust and the Portfolio" in Part I of this SAI, Timothy T. Browse (36) is a
Vice President of the Portfolio. Mr. Browse has served as a Vice President of
the Portfolio since June 19, 1995. Mr. Browse has been a Vice President of BMR
and Eaton Vance since 1993, and is an officer of various investment companies
managed by Eaton Vance or BMR. Prior to joining Eaton Vance, Mr. Browse was a
Municipal Bond Trader at Fidelity Management & Research Company (1987-1992).
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
The table below indicates the cumulative and average annual total return
on a hypothetical investment of $1,000 in the Fund from April 19, 1991 through
July 31, 1995 and for the one-year period ended July 31, 1995. The total
return for the period prior to the Fund's commencement of operations on
December 7, 1993 reflects the Portfolio's total return (or that of its
predecessor) adjusted to reflect any applicable Fund sales charge. The total
return for such prior period has not been adjusted to reflect the Fund's
service fees and certain other expenses. The performance reflects the Fund's
sales charge effective February 1, 1996.
VALUE OF A $1,000 INVESTMENT
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
TOTAL RETURN TOTAL RETURN
VALUE OF EXCLUDING SALES CHARGE INCLUDING SALES CHARGE
INVESTMENT INVESTMENT AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT ---------------------------- ---------------------------
PERIOD DATE INVESTMENT<F1> ON 7/31/95 CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED
- -------------------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Life of the Fund<F2> 4/19/91 $962.54 $1,257.82 30.68% 6.44% 25.78% 5.50%
1 Year Ended 7/31/95<F2> 7/31/94 $962.42 $1,015.52 5.52% 5.52% 1.56% 1.56%
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment return and principal value will fluctuate; shares, when
redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost.
- ----------
<FN>
<F1> Initial investment less the maximum sales charge of 3.75%. This sales charge is effective February 1, 1996. Prior thereto,
Fund shares redeemed within one year of their purchase are subject to a contingent deferred sales charge of 1%.
<F2> If a portion of the Fund's expenses had not been subsidized, the Fund would have had lower returns.
</TABLE>
For the thirty-day period ended July 31, 1995, the yield of the Fund was
3.97%. The yield required of a taxable security that would produce an after-
tax yield equivalent to that earned by the Fund of 3.97% would be 6.26%,
assuming a combined federal and State tax rate of 36.54%. If a portion of the
Fund's expenses had not been allocated to the Administrator, the Fund would
have had a lower yield.
The Fund's distribution rate (calculated on July 31, 1995 and based on the
Fund's monthly distribution paid July 24, 1995) was 4.40%, and the Fund's
effective distribution rate (calculated on the same date and based on the same
monthly distribution) was 4.49%. If a portion of the Fund's expenses had not
been allocated to the Administrator, the Fund would have had a lower
distribution rate and effective distribution rate.
See the Tax Equivalent Yield Table in this Part II for information
concerning applicable tax rates and income brackets.
CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES
As at December 29, 1995, the Trustees and officers of the Trust, as a
group, owned in the aggregate less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the
Fund. As of December 29, 1995, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.,
Jacksonville, FL was the record owner of approximately 76.4% of the
outstanding shares, which were held on behalf of its customers who are the
beneficial owners of such shares, and as to which it had voting power under
certain limited circumstances. To the knowledge of the Trust, no other person
owned of record or beneficially 5% or more of the Fund's outstanding shares as
of such date.
OTHER INFORMATION
The Trust, which is a Massachusetts business trust established in 1985,
was originally called Eaton Vance High Yield Municipals Trust. The Trust
changed its name to Eaton Vance Municipals Trust on January 7, 1991. The Fund
changed its name from EV Classic Michigan Tax Free Fund to EV Classic Michigan
Municipals Fund on December 1, 1995 and to EV Traditional Michigan Municipals
Fund on February 1, 1996.
<PAGE>
TAX EQUIVALENT YIELD TABLE
The table below gives the approximate yield a taxable security must earn
at various income brackets to produce after-tax yields equivalent to those of
tax exempt bonds yielding from 4% to 7% under the regular federal income tax,
Michigan State income tax, Michigan State intangibles tax and Michigan City
income tax laws and tax rates applicable for 1996.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
A FEDERAL AND MICHIGAN STATE
COMBINED TAX EXEMPT YIELD OF:
SINGLE RETURN JOINT RETURN FEDERAL AND 4% 4.5% 5% 5.5% 6% 6.5% 7%
- ------------------------- --------------------- MI STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------
(TAXABLE INCOME)<F1> TAX BRACKET<F2> IS EQUIVALENT TO A FULLY TAXABLE YIELD OF:
- ------------------------------------------------ ---------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Up to $ 24,000 Up to $ 40,100 21.08% 5.07% 5.70% 6.34% 6.97% 7.60% 8.24% 8.87%
$ 24,001 - $ 58,150 $ 40,101 - $ 96,900 33.15 5.98 6.73 7.48 8.23 8.98 9.72 10.47
$ 58,151 - $121,300 $ 96,901 - $147,700 35.93 6.24 7.02 7.80 8.58 9.37 10.15 10.93
$121,301 - $263,750 $147,701 - $263,750 40.58 6.73 7.57 8.41 9.26 10.10 10.94 11.78
Over $263,750 Over $263,750 43.92 7.13 8.02 8.92 9.81 10.70 11.59 12.48
<FN>
<F1> Net amount subject to federal and Michigan personal income tax after deductions and exemptions.
<F2> The combined tax brackets include a Michigan tax rate of 4.4%, Michigan City income tax rate of 1% (which may vary by city),
and a Michigan intangibles tax rate of 1.75%, and assume that Michigan State and local taxes are itemized deductions for
federal income tax purposes. Investors who do not itemize deductions on their federal income tax return will have a higher
combined bracket and higher taxable equivalent yield than those indicated above. The applicable federal tax rates within the
brackets are 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%, over the same ranges of income.
</TABLE>
Note: The federal income tax portion of above-indicated combined income tax
brackets does not take into account the effect of a reduction in the
deductibility of itemized deductions (including Michigan State and local
income taxes) for taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950.
The tax brackets also do not show the effects of phaseout of personal
exemptions for single filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950
and joint filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $176,950. The
effective tax brackets and equivalent taxable yields of such taxpayers will be
higher than those indicated above.
Yields shown are for illustration purposes only and are not meant to represent
the Fund's actual yield. No assurance can be given that the Fund will achieve
any specific tax exempt yield. While it is expected that the Portfolio will
invest principally in obligations, the interest from which is exempt from the
regular federal income tax and Michigan personal income taxes, other income
received by the Portfolio and allocated to the Fund may be taxable. The table
does not take into account state or local taxes, if any, payable on Fund
distributions except for Michigan personal income taxes. It should also be
noted that the interest earned on certain "private activity bonds" issued
after August 7, 1986, while exempt from the regular federal income tax, is
treated as a tax preference item which could subject the recipient to the
federal alternative minimum tax. The illustrations assume that the federal
alternative minimum tax is not applicable and do not take into account any tax
credits that may be available.
The information set forth above is as of the date of this SAI. Subsequent tax
law changes could result in prospective or retroactive changes in the tax
brackets, tax rates, and tax equivalent yields set forth above. Investors
should consult with their tax adviser for additional information.
<PAGE>
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART II
This Part II provides information about EV TRADITIONAL MINNESOTA
MUNICIPALS FUND. The investment objective of the Fund is to provide current
income exempt from regular federal income tax and Minnesota State personal
income taxes. The Fund currently seeks to achieve its investment objective by
investing its assets in the Minnesota Municipals Portfolio (the "Portfolio").
RISKS OF CONCENTRATION
The following information as to certain Minnesota considerations is given
to investors in view of the Portfolio's policy of concentrating its
investments in Minnesota issuers. Such information supplements the information
in the Prospectus. It is derived from sources that are generally available to
investors and is believed to be accurate. Such information constitutes only a
brief summary, does not purport to be a complete description and is based on
information from official statements relating to securities offerings of
Minnesota issuers. Neither the Trust nor the Portfolio has independently
verified this information.
The State's economic downturn has been less severe than that of the
nation, as evidenced by the State's employment growth in the early 1990s. The
State of Minnesota has no obligation to pay any bonds of its political or
governmental subdivisions, municipalities, governmental agencies, or
instrumentalities. The creditworthiness of local general obligation bonds is
dependent upon the financial condition of the local government issuer, and the
creditworthiness of revenue bonds is dependent upon the availability of
particular designated revenue sources or the financial conditions of the
underlying obligors. Although most of the bonds owned by the Portfolio are
expected to be obligations other than general obligations of the State of
Minnesota itself, there can be no assurance that the same factors that
adversely affect the economy of the State generally will not also affect
adversely the market value or marketability of such other obligations, or the
ability of the obligors to pay the principal of or interest on such
obligations.
At the local level, the property tax base has recovered after its growth
was slowed in many communities in the early 1990s by an overcapacity in
certain segments of the commercial real estate market. Local finances are also
affected by the amount of state aid that is made available. Further, various
of the issuers within the State of Minnesota, as well as the State of
Minnesota itself, whose securities may be purchased by the Portfolio, may now
or in the future be subject to lawsuits involving material amounts. It is
impossible to predict the outcome of these lawsuits. Any losses with respect
to these lawsuits may have an adverse impact on the ability of these issuers
to meet their obligations.
FEES AND EXPENSES
INVESTMENT ADVISER
As of July 31, 1995, the Portfolio had net assets of $82,967,696. For the
fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Portfolio paid BMR advisory fees of
$310,489 (equivalent to 0.37% of the Portfolio's average daily net assets for
such year). For the ten months ended July 31, 1994, the Portfolio paid BMR
advisory fees of $228,154 (equivalent to 0.36% (annualized) of the Portfolio's
average daily net assets for such period). For the period from the Portfolio's
start of business, February 1, 1993, to the fiscal year ended September 30,
1993, the Portfolio paid BMR advisory fees of $107,030 (equivalent to 0.30%
(annualized) of the Portfolio's average daily net assets for such period). The
Portfolio's Investment Advisory Agreement with BMR is dated October 13, 1992
and remains in effect until February 28, 1996. The Agreement may be continued
as described under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI.
ADMINISTRATOR
As stated under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI, the Administrator currently receives no compensation for providing
administrative services to the Fund. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995,
and for the period from the start of business, December 9, 1993, to the fiscal
year ended July 31, 1994, $24,179 and $22,241, respectively, of the Fund's
operating expenses were allocated to the Administrator.
SERVICE PLAN
The Service Plan remains in effect until April 28, 1996 and may be
continued as described under "Service Plan" in Part I of this SAI. Prior to
February 1, 1996, the Fund made sales commission, distribution fee and service
fee payments pursuant to a Distribution Plan. During the fiscal year ended
July 31, 1995, the Principal Underwriter paid to Authorized Firms sales
commissions of $35,560 under that Plan on sales of Fund shares. During the
same period, the Fund paid sales commission payments under that Plan to the
Principal Underwriter aggregating $36,299. During such period, there were no
contingent deferred sales charges imposed on early redeeming shareholders. As
at July 31, 1995, the outstanding Uncovered Distribution Charges of the
Principal Underwriter calculated under the Distribution Plan amounted to
approximately $419,000 (which amount was equivalent to 11.4% of the Fund's net
assets on such date). During the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund
accrued service fee payments under the Distribution Plan aggregating $9,699,
of which $9,447 was paid to Authorized Firms and the balance of which was
retained by the Principal Underwriter.
PRINCIPAL UNDERWRITER
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid the Principal
Underwriter $105.00 for repurchase transactions handled by the Principal
Underwriter (being $2.50 for each such transaction).
CUSTODIAN
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid IBT $3,348 and the
Portfolio paid IBT $20,399.
BROKERAGE
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the ten months ended July 31,
1994, and for the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to the
fiscal year ended September 30, 1993, the Portfolio paid no brokerage
commissions on portfolio transactions.
TRUSTEES
The fees and expenses of those Trustees of the Trust and of the Portfolio
who are not members of the Eaton Vance organization (the noninterested
Trustees) are paid by the Fund (and the other series of the Trust) and the
Portfolio, respectively. (The Trustees of the Trust and of the Portfolio who
are members of the Eaton Vance organization receive no compensation from the
Fund or the Portfolio.) During the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the
noninterested Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio received the following
compensation in their capacities as Trustees from the Fund and the Portfolio,
and, for the year ended September 30, 1995, earned the following compensation
in their capacities as Trustees of the funds in the Eaton Vance fund complex
(1):
AGGREGATE AGGREGATE TOTAL COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION COMPENSATION FROM TRUST AND
NAME FROM FUND FROM PORTFOLIO FUND COMPLEX
- ---- ------------ -------------- ------------------
Donald R. Dwight ....... $25 $1,164(2) $135,000(4)
Samuel L. Hayes, III ... 24 1,222(3) 150,000(5)
Norton H. Reamer ....... 23 1,254 135,000
John L. Thorndike ...... 24 1,336 140,000
Jack L. Treynor ........ 26 1,235 140,000
- ----------
(1) The Eaton Vance fund complex consists of 211 registered investment
companies or series thereof.
(2) Includes $294 of deferred compensation.
(3) Includes $393 of deferred compensation.
(4) Includes $35,000 of deferred compensation.
(5) Includes $33,750 of deferred compensation.
ADDITIONAL OFFICER INFORMATION
In addition to the officers of the Portfolio listed under "Officers of the
Trust and the Portfolio" in Part I of this SAI, David C. Reilly (38) is a Vice
President of the Portfolio. Mr. Reilly has served as a Vice President of the
Portfolio since December 1, 1995. Mr. Reilly has been a Vice President of BMR
since 1992 and Eaton Vance since 1991 and an employee of Eaton Vance since
1991. Prior to joining Eaton Vance, he was a Vice President and a municipal
bond analyst at Scudder, Stevens & Clark (1984-1991). Mr. Reilly is an officer
of various investment companies managed by Eaton Vance or BMR.
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
The table below indicates the cumulative and average annual total return
on a hypothetical investment of $1,000 in the Fund from July 29, 1991 through
July 31, 1995 and for the one-year period ended July 31, 1995. The total
return for the period prior to the Fund's commencement of operations on
December 9, 1993 reflects the Portfolio's total return (or that of its
predecessor) adjusted to reflect any applicable Fund sales charge. The total
return for such prior period has not been adjusted to reflect the Fund's
service fees and certain other expenses. The performance reflects the Fund's
sales charge effective February 1, 1996.
VALUE OF A $1,000 INVESTMENT
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
TOTAL RETURN TOTAL RETURN
VALUE OF EXCLUDING SALES CHARGE INCLUDING SALES CHARGE
INVESTMENT INVESTMENT AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT ---------------------------- ----------------------------
PERIOD DATE INVESTMENT<F1> ON 7/31/95 CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED
- ---------------------- ------------- ------------ ---------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- -------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Life of the Fund<F2> 7/29/91 $962.55 $1,214.72 26.20% 5.98% 21.47% 4.97%
1 Year Ended 7/31/95<F2> 7/31/94 $962.01 $1,004.78 4.45% 4.45% 0.53% 0.53%
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment return and principal value will fluctuate; shares, when
redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost.
- ----------
<FN>
<F1> Initial investment less the maximum sales charge of 3.75%. This sales charge is effective February 1, 1996. Prior thereto,
Fund shares redeemed within one year of their purchase are subject to a contingent deferred sales charge of 1%.
<F2> If a portion of the Fund's expenses had not been subsidized, the Fund would have had lower returns.
</TABLE>
For the thirty-day period ended July 31, 1995, the yield of the Fund was
4.43%. The yield required of a taxable security that would produce an after-
tax yield equivalent to that earned by the Fund of 4.43% would be 7.02%,
assuming a combined federal and State tax rate of 36.87%. If a portion of the
Fund's expenses had not been allocated to the Administrator, the Fund would
have had a lower yield.
The Fund's distribution rate (calculated on July 31, 1995 and based on the
Fund's monthly distribution paid July 24, 1995) was 4.58%, and the Fund's
effective distribution rate (calculated on the same date and based on the same
monthly distribution) was 4.67%. If a portion of the Fund's expenses had not
been allocated to the Administrator, the Fund would have had a lower
distribution rate and effective distribution rate.
See the Tax Equivalent Yield Table in this Part II for information
concerning applicable tax rates and income brackets.
CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES
As at December 29, 1995, the Trustees and officers of the Trust, as a
group, owned in the aggregate less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the
Fund. As of December 29, 1995, the following shareholders owned of record the
percentages of outstanding shares indicated after their names: PaineWebber FBO
B.F. Nelson Inc., Minneapolis, MN (28.6%); PaineWebber FBO Larry Ross,
Bloomington, MN (14.1%); and PaineWebber FBO James Yackel, Gertrude Boyum &
Jean Pedersen co-Trustees U/A dtd. 12/31/76, Hammond, IN (6.7%). To the
knowledge of the Trust, no other person owned of record or beneficially 5% or
more of the Fund's outstanding shares as of such date.
OTHER INFORMATION
The Trust, which is a Massachusetts business trust established in 1985,
was originally called Eaton Vance High Yield Municipals Trust. The Trust
changed its name to Eaton Vance Municipals Trust on January 7, 1991. The Fund
changed its name from EV Classic Minnesota Tax Free Fund to EV Classic
Minnesota Municipals Fund on December 1, 1995 and to EV Traditional Minnesota
Municipals Fund on February 1, 1996.
<PAGE>
TAX EQUIVALENT YIELD TABLE
The table below gives the approximate yield a taxable security must earn
at various income brackets to produce after-tax yields equivalent to those of
tax exempt bonds yielding from 4% to 7% under the regular federal income tax
and regular Minnesota State personal income tax laws and tax rates for 1996.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
A FEDERAL AND MINNESOTA STATE
COMBINED TAX EXEMPT YIELD OF:
SINGLE RETURN JOINT RETURN FEDERAL AND 4% 4.5% 5% 5.5% 6% 6.5% 7%
- -------------------------- -------------------- MN STATE ---------------------------------------------------------------
(TAXABLE INCOME)<F1> TAX BRACKET<F2> IS EQUIVALENT TO A FULLY TAXABLE YIELD OF:
- ------------------------------------------------ ---------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Up to $ 24,000 Up to $ 40,100 21.80% 5.12% 5.75% 6.39% 7.03% 7.67% 8.31% 8.95%
$ 24,001 - $ 58,150 $ 40,101 - $ 96,900 34.12 6.07 6.83 7.59 8.35 9.11 9.87 10.63
$ 58,151 - $121,300 $ 96,901 - $147,700 36.87 6.34 7.13 7.92 8.71 9.50 10.30 11.09
$121,301 - $263,750 $147,701 - $263,750 41.44 6.83 7.68 8.54 9.39 10.25 11.10 11.95
Over $263,750 Over $263,750 44.73 7.24 8.14 9.05 9.95 10.86 11.76 12.67
<FN>
<F1> Net amount subject to federal and Minnesota personal income tax after deductions and exemptions.
<F2> The first two combined tax brackets are calculated using the highest Minnesota tax rate within each bracket. Taxpayers with
taxable income within such brackets may have lower combined tax brackets and taxable equivalent yields than indicated above.
The combined tax brackets assume that Minnesota taxes are itemized deductions for federal income tax purposes. Investors who
do not itemize deductions on their federal income tax return will have a higher combined bracket and higher taxable equivalent
yield than those indicated above. The applicable federal tax rates within the brackets are 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%, over
the same ranges of income.
</TABLE>
Note: The federal income tax portion of above-indicated combined income tax
brackets does not take into account the effect of a reduction in the
deductibility of itemized deductions (including Minnesota State income taxes)
for taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950. The tax
brackets also do not show the effects of phaseout of personal exemptions for
single filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950 and joint
filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $176,950. The effective tax
brackets and equivalent taxable yields of such taxpayers will be higher than
those indicated above.
Yields shown are for illustration purposes only and are not meant to represent
the Fund's actual yield. No assurance can be given that the Fund will achieve
any specific tax exempt yield. While it is expected that the Portfolio will
invest principally in obligations, the interest from which is exempt from the
regular federal income tax and Minnesota personal income taxes, other income
received by the Portfolio and allocated to the Fund may be taxable. The table
does not take into account state or local taxes, if any, payable on Fund
distributions except for regular Minnesota personal income taxes. It should
also be noted that the interest earned on certain "private activity bonds"
issued after August 7, 1986, while exempt from the regular federal income tax,
and regular Minnesota personal income tax, is treated as a tax preference item
which could subject the recipient to the federal and Minnesota alternative
minimum taxes. The illustrations assume that the federal and Minnesota
alternative minimum taxes are not applicable and do not take into account any
tax credits that may be available.
The information set forth above is as of the date of this SAI. Subsequent tax
law changes could result in prospective or retroactive changes in the tax
brackets, tax rates, and tax equivalent yields set forth above. Investors
should consult with their tax adviser for additional information.
<PAGE>
STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
PART II
This Part II provides information about EV TRADITIONAL TEXAS MUNICIPALS
FUND. The investment objective of the Fund is to provide current income exempt
from regular federal income taxes. The Fund currently seeks to achieve its
investment objective by investing its assets in the Texas Municipals Portfolio
(the "Portfolio").
RISKS OF CONCENTRATION
The following information as to certain Texas considerations is given to
investors in view of the Portfolio's policy of concentrating its investments
in Texas issuers. Such information supplements the information in the
Prospectus. It is derived from sources that are generally available to
investors and is believed to be accurate. Such information constitutes only a
brief summary, does not purport to be a complete description and is based on
information from official statements relating to securities offerings of Texas
issuers. Neither the Trust nor the Portfolio has independently verified this
information.
Once largely dependent on the drilling, production, refining, chemical and
energy-related manufacturing sectors, the economy of Texas has diversified
with the major source of job growth in the State now being the service-
producing sector (which includes transportation and public utilities,
finances, insurance and real estate, trade, services, and government). Over
the past decade, the population of Texas grew at a rate twice as fast as that
of the entire United States. Currently the third largest state in the nation,
Texas is expected to move into second place by the late 1990's.
The Texas legislature passed a $80 billion biennial budget for fiscal
years 1996 and 1997. The new budget includes no new tax increases.
Historically, the primary sources of the State's revenues have been sales
taxes, mineral severance taxes and Federal grants. The beginning fiscal 1994
cash balance was $1.6 billion. The State has no personal or corporate income
tax, although the State does impose a corporate franchise tax based on the
amount of a corporation's capital and surplus. A bill was passed by the
legislature reforming educational aid. Also, the State provided additional
funding contruction for poor districts.
FEES AND EXPENSES
INVESTMENT ADVISER
As of July 31, 1995, the Portfolio had net assets of $28,227,021. For the
fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, absent a fee reduction, the Portfolio would
have paid BMR advisory fees of $56,319 (equivalent to 0.21% of the Portfolio's
average daily net assets for such year). To enhance the net income of the
Portfolio, BMR made a reduction of the full amount of its advisory fee and BMR
was allocated a portion of the expenses related to the operation of the
Portfolio in the amount of $18,606. For the ten months ended July 31, 1994,
absent a fee reduction, the Portfolio would have paid BMR advisory fees of
$31,214 (equivalent to 0.17% (annualized) of the Portfolio's average daily net
assets for such period). To enhance the net income of the Portfolio, BMR made
a reduction of the full amount of its advisory fee and BMR was allocated a
portion of the expenses related to the operation of the Portfolio in the
amount of $35,347. For the period from the Portfolio's start of business,
February 1, 1993, to the fiscal year ended September 30, 1993, absent a fee
reduction, the Portfolio would have paid BMR advisory fees of $9,014
(equivalent to 0.16% (annualized) of the Portfolio's average daily net assets
for such period). To enhance the net income of the Portfolio, BMR made a
reduction of the full amount of its advisory fee and BMR was allocated a
portion of the expenses related to the operation of the Portfolio in the
amount of $13,473. The Portfolio's Investment Advisory Agreement with BMR is
dated October 13, 1992 and remains in effect until February 28, 1996. The
Agreement may be continued as described under "Investment Adviser and
Administrator" in Part I of this SAI.
ADMINISTRATOR
As stated under "Investment Adviser and Administrator" in Part I of this
SAI, the Administrator currently receives no compensation for providing
administrative services to the Fund. For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995
and for the period from the start of business, December 8, 1993, to the fiscal
year ended July 31, 1994, $15,081 and $21,269, respectively, of the Fund's
operating expenses were allocated to the Administrator.
SERVICE PLAN
The Service Plan remains in effect until April 28, 1996 and may be
continued as described under "Service Plan" in Part I of this SAI. Prior to
February 1, 1996, the Fund made sales commission, distribution fee and service
fee payments pursuant to a Distribution Plan. During the fiscal year ended
July 31, 1995, the Principal Underwriter paid to Authorized Firms sales
commissions of $5,561 under that Plan on sales of Fund shares. During the same
period, the Fund paid sales commission payments under that Plan to the
Principal Underwriter aggregating $5,614. During such period, no contingent
deferred sales charges were paid to the Principal Underwriter. As at July 31,
1995, the outstanding Uncovered Distribution Charges of the Principal
Underwriter calculated under the Distribution Plan amounted to approximately
$81,000 (which amount was equivalent to 17.3% of the Fund's net assets on such
date). During the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid service fee
payments under the Distribution Plan aggregating $1,486, of which $1,483 was
paid to Authorized Firms and the balance of which was retained by the
Principal Underwriter.
PRINCIPAL UNDERWRITER
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid the Principal
Underwriter $22.50 for repurchase transactions handled by the Principal
Underwriter (being $2.50 for each such transaction).
CUSTODIAN
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the Fund paid IBT $4,862 and the
Portfolio paid IBT $7,834.
BROKERAGE
For the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the ten months ended July 31,
1994, and for the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to the
fiscal year ended September 30, 1993, the Portfolio paid no brokerage
commissions on portfolio transactions.
TRUSTEES
The fees and expenses of those Trustees of the Trust and of the Portfolio
who are not members of the Eaton Vance organization (the noninterested
Trustees) are paid by the Fund (and the other series of the Trust) and the
Portfolio, respectively. (The Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio who are
members of the Eaton Vance organization receive no compensation from the Fund
or the Portfolio.) During the fiscal year ended July 31, 1995, the
noninterested Trustees of the Trust and the Portfolio received the following
compensation in their capacities as Trustees from the Fund and the Portfolio,
and, for the year ended September 30, 1995, earned the following compensation
in their capacities as Trustees of the funds in the Eaton Vance fund complex
(1):
AGGREGATE AGGREGATE TOTAL COMPENSATION
COMPENSATION COMPENSATION FROM TRUST AND
NAME FROM FUND FROM PORTFOLIO FUND COMPLEX
- ---- ------------ -------------- ------------------
Donald R. Dwight .......... $0 $333(2) $135,000(4)
Samuel L. Hayes, III ...... 0 322(3) 150,000(5)
Norton H. Reamer .......... 0 314 135,000
John L. Thorndike ......... 0 318 140,000
Jack L. Treynor ........... 0 343 140,000
- ----------
(1) The Eaton Vance fund complex consists of 211 registered investment
companies or series thereof.
(2) Includes $83 of deferred compensation.
(3) Includes $103 of deferred compensation.
(4) Includes $35,000 of deferred compensation.
(5) Includes $33,750 of deferred compensation.
ADDITIONAL OFFICER INFORMATION
In addition to the officers of the Portfolio listed under "Officers of the
Trust and the Portfolio" in Part I of this SAI, Nicole Anderes (34) is a Vice
President of the Portfolio. Ms. Anderes has served as a Vice President of the
Portfolio since December 1, 1995. She joined BMR and Eaton Vance as a Vice
President in January 1994. Ms. Anderes is an officer of various investment
companies managed by Eaton Vance or BMR. Prior to joining Eaton Vance, she was
a Vice President and portfolio manager at Lazard Freres Asset Management
(1992-1994) and a Vice President and Manager -- Municipal Research at
Roosevelt & Cross (1978-1992).
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
The table below indicates the cumulative and average annual total return
on a hypothetical investment of $1,000 in the Fund from March 24, 1992 through
July 31, 1995 and for the one year period ended July 31, 1995. The total
return for the period prior to the Fund's commencement of operations on
December 8, 1993 reflects the Portfolio's total return (or that of its
predecessor) adjusted to reflect any applicable Fund sales charge. The total
return for such prior period has not been adjusted to reflect the Fund's
service fees and certain other expenses. The performance reflects the Fund's
sales charge effective February 1, 1996.
VALUE OF A $1,000 INVESTMENT
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
TOTAL RETURN TOTAL RETURN
VALUE OF EXCLUDING SALES CHARGE INCLUDING SALES CHARGE
INVESTMENT INVESTMENT AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT ---------------------------- ---------------------------
PERIOD DATE INVESTMENT<F1> ON 7/31/95 CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED CUMULATIVE ANNUALIZED
- -------------------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Life of the Fund<F2> 3/24//92 $962.49 $1,176.61 22.25% 6.17% 17.66% 4.97%
1 Year Ended 7/31/95<F2> 7/31/94 $962.46 $1,012.08 5.16% 5.16% 1.21% 1.21%
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment return and principal value will fluctuate; shares, when
redeemed, may be worth more or less than their original cost.
- ----------
<FN>
<F1> Initial investment less the maximum sales charge of 3.75%. This sales charge is effective February 1, 1996. Prior thereto,
Fund shares redeemed within one year of their purchase are subject to a contingent deferred sales charge of 1%.
<F2> If a portion of the Portfolio's and/or the Fund's expenses had not been subsidized, the Fund would have had lower returns.
</TABLE>
For the thirty-day period ended July 31, 1995, the yield of the Fund was
4.42%. The yield required of a taxable security that would produce an after-
tax yield equivalent to that earned by the Fund of 4.42% would be 6.41%,
assuming a federal tax rate of 31%. If a portion of the Portfolio's and the
Fund's expenses had not been allocated to the Investment Adviser and the
Administrator, respectively, the Fund would have had a lower yield.
The Fund's distribution rate (calculated on July 31, 1995 and based on the
Fund's monthly distribution paid July 24, 1995) was 4.90%, and the Fund's
effective distribution rate (calculated on the same date and based on the same
monthly distribution) was 5.01%. If a portion of the Portfolio's and the
Fund's expenses had not been allocated to the Investment Adviser and the
Administrator, respectively, the Fund would have had a lower distribution rate
and effective distribution rate.
See the Tax Equivalent Yield Table in this Part II for information
concerning applicable tax rates and income brackets.
TAXES
In most every state which has an income tax, dividends paid by a mutual
fund attributable to investments in a particular state's municipal obligations
are exempt from both federal and such state's income tax. If Texas adopts an
income tax in the future, and assuming that its income tax policy with respect
to mutual funds investing in Texas state and local municipal obligations would
be similar to the general tax policy of other states, dividends paid by the
Fund would be exempt from Texas state income tax.
CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES
As at December 29, 1995, the Trustees and officers of the Trust, as a
group, owned in the aggregate less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the
Fund. As of December 29, 1995, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.,
Jacksonville, FL was the record owner of approximately 76.9% of the
outstanding shares, which were held on behalf of its customers who are the
beneficial owners of such shares, and as to which it had voting power under
certain limited circumstances. In addition, as of such date, the following
shareholder owned beneficially and of record the percentage of outstanding
shares of the Fund indicated after the name: PaineWebber FBO, Dr. David H.
Medley, Rosemary Medley, TenCom, Dallas, TX (12.5%). To the knowledge of the
Trust, no other person owned of record or beneficially 5% or more of the
Fund's outstanding shares as of such date.
OTHER INFORMATION
The Trust, which is a Massachusetts business trust established in 1985,
was originally called Eaton Vance High Yield Municipals Trust. The Trust
changed its name to Eaton Vance Municipals Trust on January 7, 1991. The Fund
changed its name from EV Classic Texas Tax Free Fund to EV Classic Texas
Municipals Fund on December 1, 1995 and to EV Traditional Texas Municipals
Fund on February 1, 1996.
<PAGE>
TAX EQUIVALENT YIELD TABLE
The table shows the approximate taxable bond yields which are equivalent
to tax-exempt bond yields from 4% to 7% under the regular federal income tax
laws that apply to 1996.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
IF THE TAXABLE OR THE TAXABLE
INCOME ON INCOME ON YOU ARE IN IN YOUR BRACKET, A TAX-FREE YIELD OF
YOUR SINGLE YOUR JOINT THIS FEDERAL 4% 4.5% 5% 5.5% 6% 6.5% 7%
RETURN IS<F1> RETURN IS<F1> BRACKET EQUALS THAT OF A TAXABLE INVESTMENT YIELDING
- ------------------------------------------------ ---------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Up to $ 24,000 Up to $ 40,100 15.0% 4.71% 5.29% 5.88% 6.47% 7.06% 7.65% 8.24%
$ 24,001 - $ 58,150 $ 40,101 - $ 96,900 28.0 5.56 6.25 6.94 7.64 8.33 9.03 9.72
$ 58,151 - $121,300 $ 96,901 - $147,700 31.0 5.80 6.52 7.25 7.97 8.70 9.42 10.14
$121,301 - $263,750 $147,701 - $263,750 36.0 6.25 7.03 7.81 8.59 9.38 10.16 10.94
Over $263,750 Over $263,750 39.6 6.62 7.45 8.28 9.11 9.93 10.76 11.59
<FN>
<F1> Net amount subject to federal personal income tax after deductions and exemptions.
</TABLE>
Note: The above-indicated federal income tax brackets do not take into account
the effect of a reduction in the deductibility of itemized deductions for
taxpayers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950. The tax brackets
also do not take into account the phaseout of personal exemptions for single
filers with adjusted gross income in excess of $117,950 and joint filers with
adjusted gross income in excess of $176,950. The effective tax brackets and
equivalent taxable yields of such taxpayers will be higher than those
indicated above.
Yields shown are for illustration purposes only and are not meant to represent
the Fund's actual yield. No assurance can be given that the Fund will achieve
any specific tax exempt yield. While it is expected that the Portfolio will
invest principally in obligations, the interest from which is exempt from the
regular federal income tax, other income received by the Portfolio and
allocated to the Fund may be taxable. This table does not take into account
state or local taxes, if any, payable on Fund distributions. It should also be
noted that the interest earned on certain "private activity bonds" issued
after August 7, 1986, while exempt from the regular federal income tax, is
treated as a tax preference item which could subject the recipient to the
federal alternative minimum tax. The illustrations assume that the federal
alternative minimum tax is not applicable.
The information set forth above is as of the date of this SAI. Subsequent tax
law changes could result in prospective or retroactive changes in the tax
brackets, tax rates, and tax equivalent yields set forth above. Investors
should consult their tax adviser for additional information.
<PAGE>
EATON VANCE MUNICIPALS TRUST
FOR THE FUNDS:
- EV Classic Arizona Tax Free Fund
- EV Classic Colorado Tax Free Fund
- EV Classic Connecticut Tax Free Fund
- EV Classic Michigan Tax Free Fund
- EV Classic Minnesota Tax Free Fund
- EV Classic New Jersey Tax Free Fund
- EV Classic Pennsylvania Tax Free Fund
- EV Classic Texas Tax Free Fund
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[GRAPHIC OF A DOOR]
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANNUAL SHAREHOLDER REPORT
JULY 31, 1995
<PAGE>
Table of Contents
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
ITEM PAGE
<S> <C>
One-year results......................................................... 3
President's letter to shareholders....................................... 4
Management Reports:
EV Classic Arizona Tax Free Fund................................. 5
EV Classic Colorado Tax Free Fund................................ 6
EV Classic Connecticut Tax Free Fund............................. 7
EV Classic Michigan Tax Free Fund................................ 8
EV Classic Minnesota Tax Free Fund............................... 9
EV Classic New Jersey Tax Free Fund.............................. 10
EV Classic Pennsylvania Tax Free Fund............................ 11
EV Classic Texas Tax Free Fund................................... 12
Financial Results................................................ 13
</TABLE>
2
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR MUTUAL FUND INVESTMENT
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RESULTS FOR THE YEAR Fund's The after-tax
ENDED JULY 31, 1995. Dividends paid Fund's NAV distribution If your combined equivalent Federal
by Fund per share rate at Federal & state yield you income tax
during period at 7/31/95 7/31/95 tax rate is... would need is... information*
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
EV Classic ARIZONA $0.458 $9.51 4.63% [GRAPHIC OF 40.42% 7.74% 99.13%
Tax Free Fund ARIZONA]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ev Classic COLORADO $0.466 $9.23 4.80% [GRAPHIC OF 39.20% 7.87% 99.08%
Tax Free Fund COLORADO]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EV Classic CONNECTICUT $0.461 $9.18 4.77% [GRAPHIC OF 38.88% 7.79% 99.33%
Tax Free Fund CONNECTICUT]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EV Classic MICHIGAN $0.446 $9.26 4.57% [GRAPHIC OF 41.44% 7.77% 98.93%
Tax Free Fund MICHIGAN]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EV Classic MINNESOTA $0.466 $9.30 4.75% [GRAPHIC OF 41.44% 8.09% 99.13%
Tax Free Fund MINNESOTA]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EV Classic NEW JERSEY $0.481 $9.28 4.92% [GRAPHIC OF 40.21% 8.22% 99.46%
Tax Free Fund NEW JERSEY]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EV Classic PENNSYLVANIA $0.471 $9.18 4.88% [GRAPHIC OF 37.39% 7.84% 99.75%
Tax Free Fund PENNSYLVANIA]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EV Classic TEXAS $0.491 $9.19 5.09% [GRAPHIC OF 36.00% 7.91% 98.44%
Tax Fee Fund TEXAS]
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<FN>
* Percentages represent the amounts of the total dividends paid by the Funds, from net investment income during the year that ended
July 31, 1995, that have been designated as tax-exempt interest dividends. Tax legislation eliminated the exception to the market
discount rules applicable to tax-exempt obligations. As a result, certain tax-exempt obligations acquired by the Portfolio at
market discounts may generate a small amount of ordinary taxable income.
</TABLE>
3
<PAGE>
TO SHAREHOLDERS:
The global economy continues to demonstrate a pattern of slow growth with low
inflation. The U.S. economy is no exception, with Gross Domestic Product poised
to grow only modestly during 1995, between 2% and 3%, with inflation of less
than 3%. These characteristics bode well for all capital markets and
particularly fixed-income markets, including municipal bonds.
Indeed, municipal bonds performed well during the first half of 1995, posting
strong price gains as a result of this favorable investment environment.
However, during this period the municipal market underperformed the taxable
market because of concern about the potential passage of major tax reform (e.g.,
flat tax, value-added tax or consumption tax) legislation.
Were major tax reform to become law, municipal bonds would likely be
underperformers relative to taxable bonds because the current tax-advantaged
status of municipal bonds probably would be eliminated.
However, we at Eaton Vance believe there is little chance of major tax reform
legislation being enacted. Many reasons have led us to this conclusion. For
example, the inherent regressivity of the various flat tax proposals will
provoke much opposition, as will proposals to eliminate such tax breaks as
deductions for mortgage interest and state and local taxes. Also, such proposals
could seriously depress entire sectors of the U.S. economy.
Accordingly, we view this recent underperformance by municipal bonds due to
fears of tax reform as a potential buying opportunity. Municipal bonds could
represent an attractive asset class at these current relative trading
relationships, with the potential for future outperformance for those investors
willing to adopt a patient, long-term investment horizon.
In addition, proposals are now circulating in both Congress and the White House
to reduce the nation's budget deficit by severely cutting expenditures over the
next decade. If enacted, such a concept would drastically reduce the federal
government's borrowing needs and, as a result, would exert a meaningful downward
influence on interest rates across the entire yield curve. All fixed-income
instruments, including municipal bonds, would benefit.
<TABLE>
Headline: "DESPITE TAX POLICY UNCERTAINTIES, TAX-EXEMPT BONDS YIELD MORE THAN
88% OF TREASURY YIELDS.
Yield Bar Chart
<S> <C>
30-Year AA GOs 6.05%
GOs Tax-Equivalent 9.45%
30-year Treasury 8.9%
[This bar chart demonstrates the narrow difference between the yields of 30-year
Treasury bonds and those of 30-year AA-rated general obligation bonds. It also
shows the taxable equivalent yield of GOs in the 36% tax bracket.]
<FN>
Source: Bloomberg; 7/31/95
Principal and intrest payments of Treasury securities are guaranteed by the U.S.
government. *Bloomberg GO yield is a compilation of a representative variety of
general obligation bonds and is not necessarily represented by the Fund's
yield. Statistics as of July 31,1995. Past performance is no guarantee of future
results.
</TABLE>
We will continue to monitor changes in economic and political conditions and to
pursue the goal of your Fund: to provide you with a competitive distribution of
tax-free income from a portfolio of quality municipal bonds.+
Sincerely,
/s/ THOMAS J. FETTER
Thomas J. Fetter
President
September 20, 1995
+ A portion of the Portfolios' income could be subject to Federal alternative
minimum tax.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Included in the pages that follow are performance charts that compare your
Fund's total return with that of a broad-based securities market index. The
lines on the chart represent the total returns of $10,000 hypothetical
investments in your Fund and the unmanaged Lehman Brothers Municipal Bond Index.
The solid line on the chart represents the Fund's performance. The Fund's total
return figure reflects fund expenses and portfolio transaction costs, and
assumes the reinvestment of income dividends and capital gain distributions. The
dotted line represents the performance of the Lehman Brothers Municipal Bond
Index, a broad-based, widely recognized unmanaged index of municipal bonds.
Whereas the Fund's portfolio is composed principally of bonds solely from your
individual state, the Index is composed of bonds from all 50 states and many
jurisdictions. The Index's total return does not reflect any commissions or
expenses that would be incurred if an investor individually purchased or sold
the securities represented in the Index.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC ARIZONA TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
Navajo County PCR
Arizona Public Service Co.
The Arizona Public Service Company is one of the largest public utilities in
Arizona. Proceeds from this Navajo County Pollution Control Revenue bond issue
were directed toward various construction projects. In addition, funds were used
to upgrade the operations and maintenance facilities at the Navajo County
pollution control plant in the Painted Desert. The bond, which has a coupon of
5.5%, is insured by AMBAC and is rated Aaa by Moody's rating service. The issue
was representative of management's focus on quality during the period.
Naturally, private insurance does not remove the market risks associated with
this investment.
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<TABLE>
<S> <C>
Number of issues................................................... 89
Average quality.................................................... Aa-
Investment grade................................................... 95.9%
Effective maturity................................................. 17.17 yrs.
Largest sectors:
Utilities....................................................... 20.3%
Insured hospitals............................................... 13.1*
Insured general obligations..................................... 8.6*
Water & sewer................................................... 8.5
General obligations............................................. 7.9
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: Arizona
Arizona's economic growth has slowed in recent months but has nevertheless
remained well ahead of the rest of the nation. The state's unemployment rate
hovered near the 5% level during the first quarter of 1995 - one full
percentage point lower than a year earlier - before rising to 5.5% at mid-year
due to weakness in the construction industry. Manufacturing - widely viewed as
the lynchpin of economic growth - has slowed somewhat from its torrid 1994 pace,
when the sector accounted for nearly 10,000 new jobs, the strongest yearly gain
in a decade.
Manufacturing jobs now represent about 11% of the state's total employment.
Efforts to diversify the Arizona economy beyond mining and agriculture continued
to pay dividends in the past year. Most of the growth has centered on the
service sectors - including finance, banking, and healthcare - which support the
state's large population of retirees. Arizona remains in sound financial
condition. The state's general fund balance was boosted by cost cuts and strong
tax revenue gains in fiscal 1994 and 1995. However, scheduled tax cuts for 1996
and 1997 will produce a financial challenge for the state if the economy slows
significantly.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC ARIZONA TAX
FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through july 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 LIFE
TOTAL RETURN YEAR OF FUND*
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 5.4% 1.8%
Without CDSC 6.4% 1.8%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
EV CLASSIC ARIZONA TAX FREE FUND: $10,279
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
<CAPTION>
DATE CLASSIC AZ LEHMAN BROS.
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,099 10,114
2/94 9,898 9,852
3/94 9,401 9,451
4/94 9,442 9,531
5/94 9,515 9,614
6/94 9,442 9,558
7/94 9,658 9,730
8/94 9,680 9,764
9/94 9,485 9,621
10/94 9,196 9,450
11/94 8,935 9,279
12/94 9,224 9,483
1/95 9,602 9,754
2/95 9,968 10,038
3/95 10,057 10,153
4/95 10,067 10,165
5/95 10,391 10,490
6/95 10,216 10,398
7/95 10,279 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investment operations commenced 12/13/93. + Index information is available
only at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next month-end
following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations.
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"The market recovered significantly in the first six months of the year from the
collapse of 1994, although questions over tax reform proposals caused some
lingering uncertainty. The Portfolio benefited from its holdings of discount
issues which rallied sharply with the decline in interest rates. Because the
Arizona market was characterized by its typically low issuance and narrow
quality spreads, I have focused on upgrading quality. Moreover, I balanced a
large weighting in high quality, insured bonds with positions in higher-yielding
issues to boost the Fund's income. "
Cynthia J. Clemson
5
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC COLORADO TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
Colorado Health Facilities Auth.
Sisters of Charity Health Care
Revenue Bonds
The proceeds of these bonds were used to finance the cost of equipment, capital
expenditures and renovations on several Colorado hospitals, as well as to refund
previous outstanding debt of the Sisters of Charity Healthcare Systems. The
Colorado Health Facilities Authority provides financing for health care
facilities and is a vehicle by which Colorado health care institutions may
refinance outstanding debt. The issue has a 5.25% coupon and is insured by MBIA.
Naturally, private insurance does not remove the market risk associated with
this investment.
<TABLE>
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<S> <C>
Number of issues................................................... 46
Average quality.................................................... Aa-
Investment grade................................................... 99.0%
Effective maturity................................................. 17.18 yrs.
Largest sectors:
Insured hospitals............................................... 15.0%*
Housing ........................................................ 11.6
Insured general obligations..................................... 11.4*
Transportation.................................................. 11.1
Hospitals....................................................... 10.4
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: Colorado
The Colorado economy has reflected the slowdown at the national level.
Employment growth for the state is expected to rise a modest 2.8% for the year,
a decline from the 4.7% job growth registered in 1994. Restructuring at several
large employers in the transportation and utilities sectors - including Lowry
Air Force Base, Public Service Co., Continental Airlines, and U.S. West -
resulted in layoffs that hit the state especially hard. However, it's expected
that when the restructurings are completed, the sector will resume its fast
growth rate.
Elsewhere, the financial, insurance and real estate sectors should
enjoy above-average employment growth. Colorado's finances remain in excellent
health, thanks in part to blockbuster revenue performance in fiscal 1994 and
very strong 5.5% revenue growth in fiscal 1995. Income and excise tax revenues
were especially strong. Colorado's successful efforts to diversify its
economic base have resulted in the state's economy more closely mirroring the
national picture. While the state's growth may be impeded somewhat by higher
interest rates, Colorado should continue to enjoy a gentler "soft landing"
than the U.S. as a whole.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC COLORADO TAX
FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through July 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 Life
TOTAL RETURN Year of Fund*
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 4.9% 0.2%
Without CDSC 5.9% 0.2%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
EV CLASSIC COLORADO TAX FREE FUND: $ 9,996
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
<CAPTION>
DATE C. COLORADO LEHMAN BROS.
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,104 10,114
2/94 9,773 9,852
3/94 9,197 9,451
4/94 9,250 9,531
5/94 9,355 9,614
6/94 9,223 9,558
7/94 9,440 9,730
8/94 9,464 9,764
9/94 9,271 9,621
10/94 9,036 9,450
11/94 8,818 9,279
12/94 9,076 9,483
1/95 9,434 9,754
2/95 9,790 10,038
3/95 9,847 10,153
4/95 9,836 10,165
5/95 10,119 10,490
6/95 9,943 10,398
7/95 9,996 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investments operations commenced 12/10/93. +Index information is available
only at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next month-end
following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"Following the most difficult year on record, the bond market managed to recover
much lost ground in early 1995. Insured bonds played a large role in the
Portfolio as tight supply and narrow spreads dictated a continuing emphasis on
quality. As rates declined early in the year, the market rallied strongly. The
Fund benefited from its positions in higher-yielding bonds and discount issues,
which were established in the wake of last year's market decline. These
positions offered an attractive balance to the Portfolio's insured holdings."
Cynthia J. Clemson
6
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC CONNECTICUT TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
Loomis Chaffee School
MBIA Insured bonds
Issued in 1995 under the aegis of the Connecticut Health and Educational
Facilities Authority, the proceeds of these bonds were used to finance the
construction of a new dormitory and various renovations at Loomis Chaffee
School, a private secondary school located in Windsor. The school maintains a
selective admissions policy, has an endowment of $30 million, and has an
outstanding debt of only half that amount. The school's impressive profile and
balanced finances gave MBIA the comfort to insure this issue, which is rated
Aaa/AAA. Naturally, private insurance does not remove the market risk associated
with this investment.
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<TABLE>
<S> <C>
Number of issues................................................... 100
Average quality.................................................... Aa-
Investment grade................................................... 99.5%
Effective maturity................................................. 16.6 yrs.
Largest sectors:
Healthcare (Non-Hospital)....................................... 12.5%
Education....................................................... 10.8
Insured hospitals............................................... 10.0*
Housing......................................................... 8.2
Solid waste..................................................... 8.1
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: Connecticut
The economy in Connecticut is beginning to regain its luster. Economic
indicators such as job growth and personal income continue to strengthen from
their late 1980s bout with layoffs and restructuring that afflicted the state.
The state's deep recession led to major job losses in such industries as
finance, real estate, insurance and defense, which were hard-hit by industry
restructurings, and shrinking government appropriations. Together, those
setbacks eroded the state's economic base. However, while the employment outlook
for those industries remains relatively weak, job gains in construction,
service, trade, health care and tourism have partially offset those losses and
have helped put the state on the road to recovery.
While the municipal market has been roiled by uncertainties over tax reform and
the fallout from the Orange County debacle, investors in Connecticut tax-exempt
debt can feel comfortable knowing that this state has a long history of
conservative financial management and employs good disclosure practices.
Connecticut is steadily advancing beyond the difficulties of its recent past and
is moving to improve its financial future.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC CONNECTICUT
TAX FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND
INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through July 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 Life
TOTAL RETURN Year of Fund*
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 3.5% -0.2%
Without CDSC 4.5% -0.2%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
EV CLASSIC CONNECTICUT TAX FREE FUND: $ 9,956
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
<CAPTION>
DATE C. CONN. LEHMAN BROS.
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,086 10,114
2/94 9,854 9,852
3/94 9,348 9,451
4/94 9,370 9,531
5/94 9,444 9,614
6/94 9,343 9,558
7/94 9,529 9,730
8/94 9,531 9,764
9/94 9,337 9,621
10/94 9,070 9,450
11/94 8,747 9,279
12/94 9,037 9,483
1/95 9,373 9,754
2/95 9,687 10,038
3/95 9,765 10,153
4/95 9,764 10,165
5/95 10,015 10,490
6/95 9,860 10,398
7/95 9,956 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investment operations commenced 12/9/93. +Index information is available only
at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next month-end
following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations.
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"The extreme market volatility of last autumn created a good opportunity to
purchase deep discount bonds - even among high quality AA- and AAA-rated bonds -
and pick up yield without sacrificing credit quality. By the Spring of 1995, the
market had rallied sharply and these discount bonds had significantly
outperformed other segments of the market, adding to the performance of the
Fund. The market has quieted in recent months, especially the Connecticut
market, where new issuance is limited largely to generic general obligation
issues."
Nicole Anderes
7
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC MICHIGAN TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
City of Detroit,MI
Convention Facility Tax Revenue
Cobo Hall Expansion Project
The proceeds of these bonds were used to pre-refund a previous bond issued in
1985. The previous bond financed the acquisition and construction costs of
expanding Detroit's Cobo Hall Convention Center, a major convention and
entertainment complex. This bond is backed by the City's share of distributions
of the state of Michigan hotel occupancy tax and liquor tax deposited in the
Convention Facility Development Fund. The bond has a coupon of 5.25% and is a
good example of the Fund's efforts during the period to seek value in non-rated
bonds.
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<TABLE>
<S> <C>
Number of issues................................................... 105
Average quality.................................................... AA-
Investment grade................................................... 98.6%
Effective maturity................................................. 15.52 yrs.
Largest sectors:
Hospitals....................................................... 12.9%
Insured general obligations..................................... 12.8*
Insured hospitals............................................... 12.4*
Insured water & sewer........................................... 7.5*
Insured electric utilities...................................... 6.3*
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: Michigan
Michigan's economy remained on the upswing in 1995. The state's unemployment
rate fell to 5.1% in July as the retail, construction, and manufacturing sectors
of the economy each continued to post good results. Motor vehicle sales, while
below 1994's blistering 8.5% growth rate, continued at an annual rate well above
15 million units.The state's wage and salary levels rose slightly from last
year, with construction employment especially robust, registering a 12% gain.
Reflecting a strong regional economy, housing starts in the midwest region
surpassed those nationally.
Michigan's 1995 tax revenues are running well above last year's, with baseline
revenues rising a strong 15.4% in June. Most of the revenue increase is the
result of strong growth in income, single-business, and use taxes. The state has
also benefited from a 200% increase in the cigarette tax rate, as well as the
start-up of the new state education property and real estate taxes. As a result
of cost containment measures, tax and educational funding reforms, strong
personal income growth and tax revenue growth, Michigan's financial picture has
brightened dramatically. Reflecting that improvement, the state's credit rating
has been upgraded to AA.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC MICHIGAN TAX
FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through July 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 Life
TOTAL RETURN Year of Fund*
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 4.5% 0.2%
Without CDSC 5.5% 0.2%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
EV CLASSIC MICHIGAN TAX FREE FUND: $10,006
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
<CAPTION>
DATE C. MICHIGAN LEHMAN BROS.
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,117 10,114
2/94 9,815 9,852
3/94 9,287 9,451
4/94 9,339 9,531
5/94 9,402 9,614
6/94 9,299 9,558
7/94 9,483 9,730
8/94 9,505 9,764
9/94 9,351 9,621
10/94 9,104 9,450
11/94 8,874 9,279
12/94 9,120 9,483
1/95 9,444 9,754
2/95 9,745 10,038
3/95 9,832 10,153
4/95 9,830 10,165
5/95 10,111 10,490
6/95 9,945 10,398
7/95 10,006 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investment operations commenced 12/7/93. +Index information is available only
at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next month-end
following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations.
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"Although quality spreads - the yield difference between bonds of varying
quality - were narrow during the period, management sought opportunities in
non-rated bonds and private placements. These bonds offered opportunities to add
incremental yield to the Fund. The Fund concurrently reduced its exposure to AA
bonds, adopting a barbell strategy. That strategy should benefit the Fund in
coming months if, as I believe, income begins to comprise an increasingly large
part of total return for fixed-income investments."
Timothy T. Browse
8
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC MINNESOTA TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
Duluth MN Economic Dev. Auth
Health Care Facilities
The Duluth Clinic Ltd
The proceeds of these bonds were used to finance improvements for the
Duluth-based health clinic, as well as to refund bonds previously issued by the
Clinic.
The issue financed the acquisition of land and the building of a
55,000-square-feet clinic addition, the remodelling of additional facilities,
and the purchase and installation of new medical equipment. The bonds have a
6.2% coupon and are insured by AMBAC. Naturally, private insurance does not
remove the market risk associated with this investment.
<TABLE>
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<S> <C>
Number of issues.................................................. 75
Average quality................................................... AA
Investment grade.................................................. 98.8%
Effective maturity................................................ 16.73 yrs.
Largest sectors:
Insured hospitals.............................................. 19.6%*
Housing........................................................ 13.6
General obligations............................................ 11.1
Industrial development/Pollution Control....................... 8.8
Hospitals...................................................... 6.9
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: Minnesota
The Minnesota economy gathered momentum in the first half of 1995, with
signficant employment gains and a boost in real income. The state's jobless rate
neared historic lows as manufacturing and large retail expansions resulted in
fast job growth. Once again, the state's computer, electronics, and technology
industries were responsible for much of the employment gains. The agricultural
and food-processing sectors also enjoyed job additions. The state's economy also
benefited from infrastructure repairs and construction in areas ravaged by the
previous year's floods.
Due to Minnesota's resurgent economy, it is likely that income tax and sales tax
receipts will exceed previous budget forecasts. In a robust economic
environment, the state has been able to restore its previously depleted reserve
funds. Minnesota continues to benefit from its wide exposure to the rapidly
growing health care and technology sectors, and should be able to weather a
potential slowdown at the national level. However, the state is concurrently
facing growing social services and public safety costs that may prove a larger
financial burden in the future.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC MINNESOTA
TAX FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND
INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through July 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 Life
TOTAL RETURN Year of Fund*
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 3.5% 0.6%
Without CDSC 4.5% 0.6%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
EV CLASSIC MINNESOTA TAX FREE FUND: $10,040
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
<CAPTION>
DATE C. MINNESOTA LEHMAN BROS.
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,095 10,114
2/94 9,875 9,852
3/94 9,401 9,451
4/94 9,424 9,531
5/94 9,528 9,614
6/94 9,448 9,558
7/94 9,613 9,730
8/94 9,637 9,764
9/94 9,464 9,621
10/94 9,209 9,450
11/94 8,919 9,279
12/94 9,208 9,483
1/95 9,501 9,754
2/95 9,824 10,038
3/95 9,934 10,153
4/95 9,913 10,165
5/95 10,162 10,490
6/95 9,988 10,398
7/95 10,040 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investment operations commenced 12/9/93. +Index information is available only
at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next month-end
following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations.
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"Market conditions have resulted in very narrow quality spreads in 1995. In this
climate, I have employed a "barbell" strategy, emphasizing quality on one hand
and incremental yield additions on the other. The Portfolio's insured bonds have
been an important source of quality and liquidity. Meanwhile, I have generally
avoided par bonds in favor of discount issues. Finally, I have carefully
researched high-yielding issues as a way to add selectively to the Fund's yield
and have added to the health care sector, which has grown more attractive in
recent months."
Robert B. MacIntosh
9
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC NEW JERSEY TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
Gloucester County, NJ
Utility Authority
Water & Sewer Revenue Bonds
Issued by the Gloucester County Utility Authority, this bond was dedicated to
funding Phase III of a waste treatment facility in Gloucester County.
Specifically, the program is designed to upgrade the maintenance and operating
efficiency of a waste treatment facility. By constructing a second sludge
incinerator, the plant should reach a 20% increase in its daily capacity. The
bond provided improvements for the County, while representing an attractive
yielding investment supported by residents' water and sewer bill payments.
<TABLE>
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<S> <C>
Number of issues.................................................. 130
Average quality................................................... A
Investment grade.................................................. 87.6%
Effective maturity................................................ 16.25 yrs.
Largest sectors:
Transportation................................................. 15.1%
General obligations............................................ 13.3
Solid waste.................................................... 6.8
Hospitals...................................................... 6.6
Insured lease revenue.......................................... 5.8*
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: New Jersey
The New Jersey economy has reflected the slower activity of the national scene.
Declines in the housing market, manufacturing, and consumer spending have
contributed to the state's slowdown. Nearly 10,000 jobs have been lost in
manufacturing alone this year. The state's unemployment rate stood at 6.8% in
July, remaining well above the national rate. On a more positive note, the
service sector continued to add jobs. More than two-thirds of the 52,000 private
sector jobs created in the past year within the state were generated by the
service segment, including business, management, engineering, retailing, food
services, and health care. And while housing starts were depressed, outlays for
commercial construction and public works projects remained fairly strong.
New Jersey has benefited from its increasingly well-managed financial operations
and a strong display of fiscal prudence by the Whitman administration.
Implementing stricter cost controls and reductions in expenditures, New Jersey
is providing a model for other states hoping to control social spending.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC NEW JERSEY
TAX FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND
INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through July 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 Life
TOTAL RETURN Year of Fund*
- ---------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 4.2% 0.7%
Without CDSC 5.2% 0.7%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
EV CLASSIC NEW JERSEY TAX FREE FUND: $10,067
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
<CAPTION>
DATE C. NEW JERSEY LEHMAN BROS.
- ------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,087 10,114
2/94 9,868 9,852
3/94 9,413 9,451
4/94 9,458 9,531
5/94 9,523 9,614
6/94 9,424 9,558
7/94 9,570 9,730
8/94 9,616 9,764
9/94 9,454 9,621
10/94 9,231 9,450
11/94 8,983 9,279
12/94 9,243 9,483
1/95 9,538 9,754
2/95 9,790 10,038
3/95 9,881 10,153
4/95 9,892 10,165
5/95 10,155 10,490
6/95 10,024 10,398
7/95 10,067 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investment operations commenced 12/3/93. + Index information is available
only at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next
month-end following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations.
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"The past year has proven to be a highly volatile period for the bond market,
given last year's sharp decline and the subsequent strong market rally we have
enjoyed in 1995. I have focused on the insured sector to provide quality and
ensure good liquidity for the Portfolio. At the same time, I've increased
slightly the Portfolio's exposure to the health care sector, which has improved
somewhat in recent months, and have added some select high-yielding situations,
which helped add yield to the Fund."
Robert B. MacIntosh
10
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC PENNSYLVANIA TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
Chester County
Industrial Development Auth. Senior Life Choice of Kimberton
The proceeds of these bonds are being used to fund the construction of the
Continuing Care Retirement Center, an assisted living project in Kimberton, PA.
This issue is a good example of the Portfolio's efforts to focus on non-rated
bonds and private placement issues. Because the issue was purchased in its
entirety by Eaton Vance, we were able to structure the deal with favorable
terms. With an 8.05% coupon, the bonds represent a 250 basis point advantage
over other long-term Pennsylvania issues.
<TABLE>
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<S> <C>
Number of issues................................................. 132
Average quality.................................................. Aa-
Investment grade................................................. 95.1%
Effective maturity............................................... 14.13 yrs.
Largest sectors:
Hospitals..................................................... 22.6%
Housing....................................................... 12.3
Industrial development authority.............................. 8.7
Insured hospitals............................................. 7.1*
Escrowed...................................................... 6.5
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: Pennsylvania
The Pennsylvania economy continues to demonstrate the beneficial effects of a
shift from its past reliance on manufacturing toward a growing diversification
into the service sectors. Pennsylvania's unemployment rate declined sharply
during the period, falling to 5.4% in July. The service sector continued to
account for nearly two-thirds of the state's job gains, with health services and
social services pacing the gains. Durable goods manufacturing also added
significantly to job growth, led by metals and industrial machinery.
Pennsylvania has now posted three consecutive years with surplus operations.
That marks a significant departure from the early 1990s, when a declining
cyclical economy and rising social costs played havoc with the state's finances.
Importantly, with an improved economic mix and a stronger national and regional
picture, Pennsylvania has returned to fiscal balance in recent years. The
Commonwealth's fiscal outlook has benefited from a tax package implemented in
1991, as well as from stricter cost controls and an improving revenue base
resulting from a stronger economy.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC PENNSYLVANIA
TAX FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND
INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through July 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 Life
TOTAL RETURN Year of Fund*
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 4.4% 0.1%
Without CDSC 5.4% 0.1%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
EV CLASSIC PENNSYLVANIA TAX FREE FUND: $ 9,979
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
<CAPTION>
DATE C. PENNSYLVANIA LEHMAN BROS.
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,111 10,114
2/94 9,831 9,852
3/94 9,314 9,451
4/94 9,348 9,531
5/94 9,423 9,614
6/94 9,322 9,558
7/94 9,468 9,730
8/94 9,502 9,764
9/94 9,350 9,621
10/94 9,125 9,450
11/94 8,823 9,279
12/94 9,062 9,483
1/95 9,368 9,754
2/95 9,651 10,038
3/95 9,762 10,153
4/95 9,752 10,165
5/95 10,047 10,490
6/95 9,925 10,398
7/95 9,979 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investment operations commenced 12/3/93. +Index information is available only
at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next month-end
following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations.
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"The market outlook for the municipal sector has improved significantly
following a difficult 1994. With a slow growth economy and relatively low
municipal supply, the municipal market has fared well in 1995. Accordingly, I
have become somewhat more constructive toward the market, adding to positions in
bonds that tend to be more sensitive to interest rate changes. Elsewhere, I've
continued to be very selective about investments in hospital bonds. Finally, in
a fairly quiet market, I have looked increasingly to private placements and
non-rated bonds for opportunities to increase the Fund's yield."
David C. Reilly
11
<PAGE>
EV CLASSIC TEXAS TAX FREE FUND
YOUR INVESTMENT AT WORK
Round Rock TX School District
Permanent School Fund
The Round Rock, TX school district serves a small community north of Austin.
Insured by the state's Permanent School Fund, the issue is rated AAA. The
state's Permanent School Fund finances Texas public education, with interest and
dividend income subsidizing local school operations. PSF bonds are popular with
the state's investors because they benefit Texas schools only and represent a
further diversification away from the major national municipal insurers.
Naturally, private insurance does not remove the market risk associated with
this investment.
<TABLE>
PORTFOLIO OVERVIEW
Based on market value as of July 31, 1995
<S> <C>
Number of issues................................................. 60
Average quality.................................................. AA
Investment grade................................................. 97.3%
Effective maturity............................................... 16.49 yrs.
Largest sectors:
General obligations........................................... 16.8%
Insured electric utilities.................................... 14.5*
Insured transportation........................................ 12.0*
Hospitals..................................................... 11.1
Industrial develop./pollution control......................... 7.0
<FN>
* Private insurance does not remove the risk of loss of principal due to changes
in market conditions that is associated with this investment.
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE STATE OF THE STATE: Texas
The Texas economy has outpaced the national output throughout the 1990s. The
economy continues to expand while diversifying its employment base. In 1994
alone, 250,000 jobs were added. That pace is expected to continue into 1995, as
the state increases its exposure to the manufacturing and service sectors.
Construction has been especially strong as the state has seen a strong
in-migration from other states. That is a marked departure from the 1980s, when
the oil and gas economy was wracked by a deep recession. In July, the state's
unemployment rate hovered around the 6% level, slightly above the national rate.
The Texas financial picture is improving. Despite a 10% growth in budgeted
expenditures, the state has returned to a balanced budget due to a surge in
income tax and sales tax revenues. The state is expanding its economy and is
poised to benefit from increased trade with Latin America. Texas is also
addressing important fiscal issues, including Medicaid, welfare reform, and
educational funding.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
COMPARISON OF CHANGE IN VALUE OF A $10,000 INVESTMENT IN EV CLASSIC TEXAS TAX
FREE FUND (INCLUDING SALES CHARGE) AND THE LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX
From December 31, 1993, through July 31, 1995
<CAPTION>
CUMULATIVE 1 Life
TOTAL RETURN Year of Fund*
<S> <C> <C>
With CDSC 4.2% 0.3%
Without CDSC 5.2% 0.3%
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
EV CLASSIC TEXAS TAX FREE FUND: $10,041
LEHMAN BROTHERS MUNICIPAL BOND INDEX: $10,496
[BAR CHART USING THE FOLLOWING FIGURES AS PLOT POINTS]
<CAPTION>
DATE C. TEXAS LEHMAN BROS.
<S> <C> <C>
12/93+ 10,000 10,000
1/94 10,141 10,114
2/94 9,822 9,852
3/94 9,275 9,451
4/94 9,321 9,531
5/94 9,418 9,614
6/94 9,328 9,558
7/94 9,538 9,730
8/94 9,585 9,764
9/94 9,403 9,621
10/94 9,138 9,450
11/94 8,847 9,279
12/94 9,141 9,483
1/95 9,482 9,754
2/95 9,811 10,038
3/95 9,893 10,153
4/95 9,873 10,165
5/95 10,171 10,490
6/95 9,996 10,398
7/95 10,041 10,496
<FN>
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Investment returns and
principal will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed, may be
worth more or less than their original cost. Source: Towers Data Systems,
Bethesda, MD.
* Investment operations commenced 12/8/93. +Index information is available only
at month-end, therefore, the line comparison begins at the next month-end
following the commencement of the Fund's investment operations.
</TABLE>
FROM THE PORTFOLIO MANAGER:
"In a market characterized by narrow quality spreads, insured bonds composed a
significant portion of the Portfolio, affording continuing high quality as well
as good liquidity. While insured bonds provided quality, I looked to the
non-rated sectors to add yield to the Fund. I sought to take advantage of market
inefficiencies in that sector to add attractive issues to the Portfolio. In my
view, income is likely to be an increasingly important component of total return
in coming months."
Timothy T. Browse
12
<PAGE>
-------
Ev Classic Tax Free Funds
Financial Statements
STATEMENTS OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
FUND FUND FUND FUND
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
ASSETS:
Investments --
Identified cost $2,424,131 $1,912,275 $4,593,347 $4,558,125
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) 8,446 38,550 (1,480) (45,753)
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Total investment in Portfolio, at value (Note 1A) $2,432,577 $1,950,825 $4,591,867 $4,512,372
Receivable for Fund shares sold 10,010 -- -- --
Receivable from the Administrator (Note 4) 18,453 17,169 22,099 12,579
Other assets 565 -- -- --
Deferred organization expenses (Note 1D) 6,959 5,906 7,658 7,360
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Total assets $2,468,564 $1,973,900 $4,621,624 $4,532,311
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
LIABILITIES:
Dividends payable $ 2,179 $ 1,814 $ 4,225 $ 3,965
Payable for Fund shares redeemed -- -- 2,209 51,151
Payable to affiliates --
Trustees' fees -- -- -- 14
Custodian fee 84 84 84 63
Accrued expenses 1,091 895 1,446 1,692
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Total liabilities $ 3,354 $ 2,793 $ 7,964 $ 56,885
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
NET ASSETS $2,465,210 $1,971,107 $4,613,660 $4,475,426
========== ========== ========== ==========
SOURCES OF NET ASSETS:
Paid-in capital $2,588,829 $2,083,570 $4,730,988 $4,861,363
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and financial
futures transactions (computed on the basis of
identified cost) (140,470) (157,228) (118,946) (354,495)
Accumulated undistributed net investment income 8,405 6,215 3,098 14,311
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments and
financial futures contracts from Portfolio (computed
on the basis of identified cost) 8,446 38,550 (1,480) (45,753)
---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Total $2,465,210 $1,971,107 $4,613,660 $4,475,426
========== ========== ========== ==========
SHARES OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST OUTSTANDING 259,292 213,512 502,774 483,268
========== ========== ========== ==========
NET ASSET VALUE, OFFERING PRICE AND REDEMPTION PRICE
PER SHARE (net assets / shares of beneficial interest
outstanding)(Note 6) $9.51 $9.23 $9.18 $9.26
===== ===== ===== =====
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
13
<PAGE>
-------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
STATEMENTS OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND
---------- ---------- ------------ --------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
ASSETS:
Investments --
Identified cost $3,599,799 $3,296,342 $2,780,049 $476,950
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) 60,097 (11,443) (144,008) (31,789)
---------- ---------- ---------- --------
Total investment in Portfolio, at value (Note 1A) $3,659,896 $3,284,899 $2,636,041 $445,161
Receivable for Fund shares sold -- -- -- --
Receivable from the Administrator (Note 4) 24,179 22,188 19,615 15,081
Deferred organization expenses (Note 1D) 9,097 10,081 8,898 9,588
---------- ---------- ---------- --------
Total assets $3,693,172 $3,317,168 $2,664,554 $469,830
---------- ---------- ---------- --------
LIABILITIES:
Dividends payable $ 3,361 $ 3,135 $ 2,514 $ 457
Payable for Fund shares redeemed -- 5,000 39,234 --
Payable to affiliates --
Trustees' fees 14 -- -- --
Custodian fee 84 84 -- 84
Accrued expenses 1,402 1,553 1,973 668
---------- ---------- ---------- --------
Total liabilities $ 4,861 $ 9,772 $ 43,721 $ 1,209
---------- ---------- ---------- --------
NET ASSETS $3,688,311 $3,307,396 $2,620,833 $468,621
========== ========== ========== ========
SOURCES OF NET ASSETS:
Paid-in capital $3,936,636 $3,495,659 $3,038,340 $561,594
Accumulated net realized loss on investment and financial
futures transactions (computed on the basis of
identified cost) (321,125) (182,451) (281,486) (61,218)
Accumulated undistributed net investment income 12,703 5,631 7,987 34
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments and
financial futures contracts from Portfolio (computed on
the basis of identified cost) 60,097 (11,443) (144,008) (31,789)
---------- ---------- ---------- --------
Total $3,688,311 $3,307,396 $2,620,833 $468,621
========== ========== ========== ========
SHARES OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST OUTSTANDING 396,543 356,587 285,423 51,002
========== ========== ========== ========
NET ASSET VALUE, OFFERING PRICE AND REDEMPTION PRICE
PER SHARE (net assets / shares of beneficial interest
outstanding)(Note 6) $9.30 $9.28 $9.18 $9.19
===== ===== ===== =====
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
14
<PAGE>
-------
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
FUND FUND FUND FUND
--------- --------- ----------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INVESTMENT INCOME (NOTE 1B):
Interest income allocated from Portfolio $ 190,274 $ 140,211 $ 240,411 $ 346,533
Expenses allocated from Portfolio (15,748) (5,718) (20,347) (26,465)
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Net investment income from Portfolio $ 174,526 $ 134,493 $ 220,064 $ 320,068
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Expenses --
Compensation of Trustees not members of the
Administrator's organization (Note 4) $ -- $ -- $ -- $ 163
Distribution costs (Note 5) 28,540 21,174 36,577 51,466
Custodian fees (Note 4) 4,972 4,950 3,449 3,955
Registration costs 5,314 186 550 1,289
Legal and accounting services 5,288 4,155 5,366 7,626
Transfer and dividend disbursing agent fees 2,370 1,532 3,252 4,130
Amortization of organization expenses (Note 1D) 1,990 1,763 2,284 2,166
Printing and postage 1,535 5,099 5,279 5,950
Miscellaneous 737 578 1,919 1,157
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Total expenses $ 50,746 $ 39,437 $ 58,676 $ 77,902
Deduct allocation of expenses to the Administrator (Note 4) 18,453 17,169 22,099 12,579
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Net expenses $ 32,293 $ 22,268 $ 36,577 $ 65,323
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Net investment income $ 142,233 $ 112,225 $ 183,487 $ 254,745
--------- --------- --------- ---------
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENTS:
Net realized loss from Portfolio --
Investment transactions (identified cost basis) $(101,251) $(106,034) $ (54,933) $(184,280)
Financial futures contracts (17,601) (31,604) (64,301) (55,979)
--------- --------- --------- ----------
Net realized loss on investments $(118,852) $(137,638) $(119,234) $(240,259)
Change in unrealized appreciation of investments and
financial futures contracts 158,005 125,129 103,779 255,527
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) $ 39,153 $ (12,509) $ (15,455) $ 15,268
--------- --------- --------- ---------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 181,386 $ 99,716 $ 168,032 $ 270,013
========= ========= ========= =========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
15
<PAGE>
-------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND
--------- ---------- ------------ --------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INVESTMENT INCOME (NOTE 1B):
Interest income allocated from Portfolio $ 302,088 $ 231,446 $ 217,731 $ 45,245
Expenses allocated from Portfolio (22,764) (18,665) (16,581) (467)
--------- --------- --------- --------
Net investment income from Portfolio $ 279,324 $ 212,781 $ 201,150 $ 44,778
--------- --------- --------- --------
Expenses --
Compensation of Trustees not members of the
Administrator's organization (Note 4) $ 136 $ -- $ -- $ --
Distribution costs (Note 5) 45,493 33,946 31,462 6,864
Custodian fees (Note 4) 3,348 4,973 2,576 4,862
Registration costs 1,821 840 -- --
Legal and accounting services 5,632 4,243 6,698 3,463
Transfer and dividend disbursing agent fees 1,762 2,698 2,591 713
Amortization of organization expenses (Note 1D) 2,719 3,022 2,664 1,356
Printing and postage 9,793 6,412 4,459 4,327
Miscellaneous 1,178 -- 1,455 360
--------- --------- --------- --------
Total expenses $ 71,882 $ 56,134 $ 51,905 $ 21,945
Deduct allocation of expenses to the Administrator
(Note 4) 24,179 22,188 19,615 15,081
--------- --------- --------- --------
Net expenses $ 47,703 $ 33,946 $ 32,290 $ 6,864
--------- --------- --------- --------
Net investment income $ 231,621 $ 178,835 $ 168,860 $ 37,914
--------- --------- --------- --------
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENTS:
Net realized loss from Portfolio --
Investment transactions (identified cost basis) $(245,784) $(130,673) $(189,650) $(43,354)
Financial futures contracts (59,656) (38,339) (36,892) (4,571)
--------- --------- --------- --------
Net realized loss on investments $(305,440) $(169,012) $(226,542) $(47,925)
Change in unrealized appreciation of investments and
financial future contracts 307,608 149,685 162,979 13,112
--------- --------- --------- --------
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) $ 2,168 $ (19,327) $ (63,563) $(34,813)
--------- --------- --------- --------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 233,789 $ 159,508 $ 105,297 $ 3,101
========= ========= ========= ========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
16
<PAGE>
-------
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
FUND FUND FUND FUND
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 142,233 $ 112,225 $ 183,487 $ 254,745
Net realized loss on investments (118,852) (137,638) (119,234) (240,259)
Change in unrealized appreciation of investments 158,005 125,129 103,779 255,527
----------- ----------- ---------- -----------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 181,386 $ 99,716 $ 168,032 $ 270,013
----------- ----------- ---------- -----------
Distributions to shareholders (Note 2) --
From net investment income $ (142,233) $ (112,225) $ (183,487) $ (254,745)
In excess of net investment income (7,151) (3,110) (10,948) (14,453)
----------- ----------- ---------- -----------
Total distributions to shareholders $ (149,384) $ (115,335) $ (194,435) $ (269,198)
----------- ----------- ---------- -----------
Transactions in shares of beneficial interest
(Note 3) --
Proceeds from sales of shares $ 2,579,387 $ 1,183,260 $2,108,441 $ 824,670
Net asset value of shares issued to shareholders
in payment of distributions declared 107,328 82,822 154,657 219,640
Cost of shares redeemed (2,665,165) (1,621,569) (837,950) (2,935,769)
----------- ----------- ---------- -----------
Increase (decrease) in net assets from Fund
share transactions $ 21,550 $ (355,487) $1,425,148 $(1,891,459)
----------- ----------- ---------- -----------
Net increase (decrease) in net assets $ 53,552 $ (371,106) $1,398,745 $(1,890,644)
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of year 2,411,658 2,342,213 3,214,915 6,366,070
----------- ----------- ---------- -----------
At end of year $ 2,465,210 $ 1,971,107 $4,613,660 $ 4,475,426
=========== =========== ========== ===========
ACCUMULATED UNDISTRIBUTED NET INVESTMENT INCOME
INCLUDED IN NET ASSETS AT END OF YEAR $ 8,405 $ 6,215 $ 3,098 $ 14,311
=========== =========== ========== ===========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
17
<PAGE>
-------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND
----------- ----------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 231,621 $ 178,835 $ 168,860 $ 37,914
Net realized loss on investments (305,440) (169,012) (226,542) (47,925)
Change in unrealized appreciation of investments 307,608 149,685 162,979 13,112
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 233,789 $ 159,508 $ 105,297 $ 3,101
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------
Distributions to shareholders (Note 2) --
From net investment income $ (231,621) $ (178,835) $ (168,860) $ (37,914)
In excess of net investment income (11,629) (9,613) (7,552) (2,657)
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------
Total distributions to shareholders $ (243,250) $ (188,448) $ (176,412) $ (40,571)
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------
Transactions in shares of beneficial interest
(Note 3) --
Proceeds from sales of shares $ 1,422,669 $ 646,496 $ 694,753 $ 111,406
Net asset value of shares issued to shareholders
in payment of distributions declared 73,152 112,416 128,368 22,726
Cost of shares redeemed (2,749,588) (1,139,533) (2,833,146) (774,799)
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------
Decrease in net assets from Fund share
transactions $(1,253,767) $ (380,621) $(2,010,025) $ (640,667)
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------
Net decrease in net assets $(1,263,228) $ (409,561) $(2,081,140) $ (678,137)
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of year 4,951,539 3,716,957 4,701,973 1,146,758
----------- ----------- ----------- ----------
At end of year $ 3,688,311 $ 3,307,396 $ 2,620,833 $ 468,621
=========== =========== =========== ==========
ACCUMULATED UNDISTRIBUTED NET INVESTMENT INCOME
INCLUDED IN NET ASSETS AT END OF YEAR $ 12,703 $ 5,631 $ 7,987 $ 34
=========== =========== =========== ==========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
18
<PAGE>
-------
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1994*
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
FUND FUND FUND FUND
----------- ---------- ----------- ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 57,360 $ 41,385 $ 42,705 $ 138,309
Net realized gain (loss) on investments (21,618) (19,590) 288 (114,236)
Unrealized depreciation of investments (149,559) (86,579) (105,259) (301,280)
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Net decrease in net assets from operations $ (113,817) $ (64,784) $ (62,266) $ (277,207)
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Distributions to shareholders (Note 2) --
From net investment income $ (57,360) $ (41,385) $ (42,705) $ (138,309)
In excess of net investment income (10,784) (9,541) (11,630) (24,606)
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Total distributions to shareholders $ (68,144) $ (50,926) $ (54,335) $ (162,915)
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Transactions in shares of beneficial interest (Note 3) --
Proceeds from sales of shares $ 4,401,491 $3,305,061 $3,775,008 $7,607,237
Net asset value of shares issued to shareholders in
payment of distributions declared 46,302 31,649 36,571 123,118
Cost of shares redeemed (1,854,174) (878,787) (480,063) (924,163)
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Increase in net assets from Fund share transactions $ 2,593,619 $2,457,923 $3,331,516 $6,806,192
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Net increase in net assets $ 2,411,658 $2,342,213 $3,214,915 $6,366,070
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of period -- -- -- --
----------- ---------- ---------- ----------
At end of period $ 2,411,658 $2,342,213 $3,214,915 $6,366,070
=========== ========== ========== ==========
ACCUMULATED UNDISTRIBUTED (DISTRIBUTIONS IN EXCESS OF) NET
INVESTMENT INCOME INCLUDED IN NET ASSETS AT END OF PERIOD $ (415) $ (2,228) $ (3,810) $ 65
=========== ========== ========== ==========
</TABLE>
* For the Classic Arizona, Classic Colorado, Classic Connecticut and Classic
Michigan Funds, the Statements of Changes in Net Assets are for the period
from the start of business, December 13, 1993, December 10, 1993, December 9,
1993, and December 7, 1993, respectively, to July 31, 1994.
See notes to financial statements
19
<PAGE>
-------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1994*
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 101,803 $ 67,465 $ 113,896 $ 25,192
Net realized loss on investments (15,685) (13,439) (54,944) (13,293)
Unrealized depreciation of investments (247,511) (161,128) (306,987) (44,901)
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
Net decrease in net assets from operations $ (161,393) $ (107,102) $ (248,035) $ (33,002)
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
Distributions to shareholders (Note 2) --
From net investment income $ (101,803) $ (67,465) $ (113,896) $ (25,192)
In excess of net investment income (18,488) (14,760) (21,849) (5,699)
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
Total distributions to shareholders $ (120,291) $ (82,225) $ (135,745) $ (30,891)
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
Transactions in shares of beneficial interest
(Note 3) --
Proceeds from sales of shares $5,944,730 $4,695,484 $ 6,980,797 $1,336,515
Net asset value of shares issued to shareholders in
payment of distributions declared 50,263 50,221 109,237 10,081
Cost of shares redeemed (761,770) (839,421) (2,004,281) (135,945)
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Increase in net assets from Fund share transactions $5,233,223 $3,906,284 $ 5,085,753 $1,210,651
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Net increase in net assets $4,951,539 $3,716,957 $ 4,701,973 $1,146,758
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of period -- -- -- --
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
At end of period $4,951,539 $3,716,957 $ 4,701,973 $1,146,758
========== ========== =========== ==========
ACCUMULATED DISTRIBUTIONS IN EXCESS OF NET INVESTMENT
INCOME INCLUDED IN NET ASSETS AT END OF PERIOD $ (875) $ (3,068) $ (2,598) $ (1,487)
========== ========== =========== ==========
</TABLE>
* For the Classic Minnesota, Classic New Jersey, Classic Pennsylvania and
Classic Texas Funds, the Statements of Changes in Net Assets are for the
period from the start of business, December 9, 1993, December 3, 1993,
December 3, 1993, and December 8, 1993, respectively, to July 31, 1994.
See notes to financial statements
20
<PAGE>
-------
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC ARIZONA FUND CLASSIC COLORADO FUND CLASSIC CONNECTICUT FUND
----------------------------- ----------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NET ASSET VALUE,
beginning of year $ 9.390 $ 10.000 $ 9.180 $ 10.000 $ 9.250 $ 10.000
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
INCOME (LOSS) FROM
OPERATIONS:
Net investment income $ 0.432 $ 0.253 $ 0.450 $ 0.256 $ 0.431 $ 0.246
Net realized and
unrealized gain (loss)
on investments 0.142 (0.563) 0.062++ (0.761) (0.044) (0.683)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
Total income (loss)
from operations $ 0.574 $ (0.310) $ 0.512 $ (0.505) $ 0.387 $ (0.437)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
LESS DISTRIBUTIONS:
From net investment
income $(0.432) $ (0.253) $(0.450) $ (0.256) $(0.431) $ (0.246)
In excess of net
investment income (0.022) (0.047) (0.012) (0.059) (0.026) (0.067)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
Total distributions $(0.454) $ (0.300) $(0.462) $ (0.315) $(0.457) $ (0.313)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
NET ASSET VALUE,
end of year $ 9.510 $ 9.390 $ 9.230 $ 9.180 $ 9.180 $ 9.250
======= ======== ======= ======== ======= ========
TOTAL RETURN (2) 6.44% (3.23)% 5.89% (5.22)% 4.49% (4.53)%
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA**:
Net assets,
end of period
(000 omitted) $ 2,465 $ 2,412 $ 1,971 $ 2,342 $ 4,614 $ 3,215
Ratio of net expenses
to average daily
net assets (1) 1.60% 1.75%+ 1.26% 1.38%+ 1.48% 1.64%+
Ratio of net investment
income to average daily
net assets 4.73% 4.14%+ 5.04% 4.20%+ 4.76% 4.07%+
CLASSIC MICHIGAN FUND
-----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C>
NET ASSET VALUE,
beginning of year $ 9.220 $ 10.000
------- --------
INCOME (LOSS) FROM
OPERATIONS:
Net investment income $ 0.419 $ 0.261
Net realized and
unrealized gain (loss)
on investments 0.063 (0.733)
------- --------
Total income (loss)
from operations $ 0.482 $ (0.472)
------- --------
LESS DISTRIBUTIONS:
From net investment
income $(0.419) $ (0.261)
In excess of net
investment income (0.023) (0.047)
------- --------
Total distributions $(0.442) $ (0.308)
------- --------
NET ASSET VALUE,
end of year $ 9.260 $ 9.220
======= ========
TOTAL RETURN (2) 5.52% (4.88)%
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA**:
Net assets,
end of period
(000 omitted) $ 4,475 $ 6,366
Ratio of net expenses
to average daily
net assets (1) 1.69% 1.69%+
Ratio of net investment
income to average daily
net assets 4.70% 4.18%+
** For the year ended July 31, 1995 and for the period from the start of
business, December 13, 1993, December 10, 1993, December 9, 1993 and December
7, 1993, respectively, to July 31, 1994 the operating expenses of the Funds
and the Portfolios may reflect a reduction of expenses by the Administrator
or Investment Adviser. Had such actions not been taken, net investment income
per share and ratios would have been as follows:
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC ARIZONA FUND CLASSIC COLORADO FUND CLASSIC CONNECTICUT FUND
----------------------------- ----------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NET INVESTMENT INCOME
PER SHARE $ 0.376 $ 0.181 $ 0.368 $ 0.146 $ 0.379 $ 0.141
======= ======== ======= ======== ======= ========
RATIOS (As a percentage
of average daily
net assets):
Expenses(1) 2.21% 2.93%+ 2.18% 3.18%+ 2.05% 3.37%+
Net investment
income 4.12% 2.96%+ 4.12% 2.40%+ 4.19% 2.34%+
CLASSIC MICHIGAN FUND
-----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C>
NET INVESTMENT INCOME
PER SHARE $ 0.398 $ 0.235
======= ========
RATIOS (As a percentage
of average daily
net assets):
Expenses(1) 1.92% 2.11%+
Net investment
income 4.47% 3.76%+
+ Annualized.
(1) Includes the Fund's share of its corresponding Portfolio's allocated expenses.
(2) Total return is calculated assuming a purchase at the net asset value on the first day and a sale at the net asset
value on the last day of each period reported. Dividends and distributions, if any, are assumed to be reinvested at
the net asset value on the payable date. Total return is computed on a nonannualized basis.
++ The per share amount is not in accord with the net realized and unrealized gain (loss) for the period because of the
timing of sales of Fund shares and the amount of the per share realized and unrealized gains and losses at such time.
* For the Classic Arizona, Classic Colorado, Classic Connecticut and Classic Michigan Funds, the Financial Highlights
are for the period from the start of business, December 13, 1993, December 10, 1993, December 9, 1993, and December
7, 1993, respectively, to July 31, 1994.
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
21
<PAGE>
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
-------
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC MINNESOTA FUND CLASSIC NEW JERSEY FUND CLASSIC PENNSYLVANIA FUND
----------------------------- ----------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NET ASSET VALUE,
beginning of year $ 9.370 $ 10.000 $ 9.300 $ 10.000 $ 9.180 $ 10.000
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
INCOME (LOSS) FROM
OPERATIONS:
Net investment income $ 0.440 $ 0.267 $ 0.452 $ 0.276 $ 0.447 $ 0.279
Net realized and
unrealized gain (loss)
on investments (0.048)++ (0.582) 0.004++ (0.640) (0.020) (0.766)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
Total income (loss)
from operations $ 0.392 $ (0.315) $ 0.456 $ (0.364) $ 0.467 $ (0.487)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
LESS DISTRIBUTIONS:
From net investment
income $(0.440) $ (0.267) $(0.452) $ (0.276) $(0.447) $ (0.279)
In excess of net
investment income (0.022) (0.048) (0.024) (0.060) (0.020) (0.054)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
Total distributions $(0.462) $ (0.315) $(0.476) $ (0.336) $(0.467) $ (0.333)
------- -------- ------- -------- ------- --------
NET ASSET VALUE,
end of year $ 9.300 $ 9.370 $ 9.280 $ 9.300 $ 9.180 $ 9.180
======= ======== ======= ======== ======= ========
TOTAL RETURN (2) 4.45% (3.29)% 5.20% (3.82)% 5.40% (5.04)%
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA**:
Net assets,
end of period
(000 omitted) $ 3,688 $ 4,952 $ 3,307 $ 3,717 $ 2,621 $ 4,702
Ratio of net expenses
to average daily
net assets (1) 1.47% 1.51%+ 1.47% 1.64%+ 1.48% 1.66%+
Ratio of net investment
income to average daily
net assets 4.84% 4.33%+ 5.01% 4.30%+ 5.10% 4.43%+
CLASSIC TEXAS FUND
-----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C>
NET ASSET VALUE,
beginning of year $ 9.230 $ 10.000
------- --------
INCOME (LOSS) FROM
OPERATIONS:
Net investment income $ 0.455 $ 0.267
Net realized and
unrealized gain (loss)
on investments (0.008) (0.709)
------- --------
Total income (loss)
from operations $ 0.447 $ (0.442)
------- --------
LESS DISTRIBUTIONS:
From net investment
income $(0.455) $ (0.267)
In excess of net
investment income (0.032) (0.061)
------- --------
Total distributions $(0.487) $ (0.328)
------- --------
NET ASSET VALUE,
end of year $ 9.190 $ 9.230
======= ========
TOTAL RETURN (2) 5.16% (4.61)%
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA**:
Net assets,
end of period
(000 omitted) $ 469 $ 1,147
Ratio of net expenses
to average daily
net assets (1) 1.01% 1.08%+
Ratio of net investment
income to average daily
net assets 5.25% 4.53%+
** For the year ended July 31, 1995 and for the period from the start of
business, December 9, 1993, December 3, 1993, December 3, 1993 and December
8, 1993, respectively, to July 31, 1994 the operating expenses of the Funds
and the Portfolios may reflect a reduction of expenses by the Administrator
or Investment Adviser. Had such actions not been taken, net investment income
per share and ratios would have been as follows:
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC MINNESOTA FUND CLASSIC NEW JERSEY FUND CLASSIC PENNSYLVANIA FUND
----------------------------- ----------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994* JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- -------------- ------------- -------------- ------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NET INVESTMENT INCOME
PER SHARE $ 0.394 $ 0.209 $ 0.396 $ 0.184 $ 0.395 $ 0.235
======= ======== ======= ======== ======= ========
RATIOS (As a percentage
of average daily
net assets):
Expenses(1) 1.98% 2.45%+ 2.09% 3.08%+ 2.07% 2.36%+
Net investment
income 4.33% 3.38%+ 4.39% 2.86%+ 4.51% 3.73%+
CLASSIC TEXAS FUND
-----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, 1995 JULY 31, 1994*
------------- --------------
<S> <C> <C>
NET INVESTMENT INCOME
PER SHARE $ 0.254 $ 0.024
======= ========
RATIOS (As a percentage
of average daily
net assets):
Expenses(1) 3.33% 5.20%+
Net investment
income 2.93% 0.41%+
+ Annualized.
(1) Includes the Fund's share of its corresponding Portfolio's allocated expenses.
(2) Total return is calculated assuming a purchase at the net asset value on the first day and a sale at the net asset
value on the last day of each period reported. Dividends and distributions, if any, are assumed to be reinvested at
the net asset value on the payable date. Total return is computed on a nonannualized basis.
++ The per share amount is not in accord with the net realized and unrealized gain (loss) for the period because of the
timing of sales of Fund shares and the amount of the per share realized and unrealized gains and losses at such time.
* For the Classic Minnesota, Classic New Jersey, Classic Pennsylvania and Classic Texas Funds, the Financial Highlights
are for the period from the start of business, December 9, 1993, December 3, 1993, December 3, 1993, and December 8,
1993, respectively, to July 31, 1994.
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
22
<PAGE>
-------
Notes to Financial Statements
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Eaton Vance Municipals Trust (the Trust) is an entity of the type commonly known
as a Massachusetts business trust and is registered under the Investment Company
Act of 1940, as amended, as an open-end investment management company. The Trust
presently consists of sixty-three Funds, eight of which are included in these
financial statements. They include EV Classic Arizona Tax Free Fund ("Classic
Arizona Fund"), EV Classic Colorado Tax Free Fund ("Classic Colorado Fund"), EV
Classic Connecticut Tax Free Fund ("Classic Connecticut Fund"), EV Classic
Michigan Tax Free Fund ("Classic Michigan Fund"), EV Classic Minnesota Tax Free
Fund ("Classic Minnesota Fund"), EV Classic New Jersey Tax Free Fund ("Classic
New Jersey Fund"), EV Classic Pennsylvania Tax Free Fund ("Classic Pennsylvania
Fund"), and EV Classic Texas Tax Free Fund ("Classic Texas Fund"). Each Fund
invests all of its investable assets in interests in a separate corresponding
open-end management investment company (a "Portfolio"), a New York Trust, having
the same investment objective as its corresponding Fund. The Classic Arizona
Fund invests its assets in the Arizona Tax Free Portfolio, the Classic Colorado
Fund invests its assets in the Colorado Tax Free Portfolio, the Classic
Connecticut Fund invests its assets in the Connecticut Tax Free Portfolio, the
Classic Michigan Fund invests its assets in the Michigan Tax Free Portfolio, the
Classic Minnesota Fund invests its assets in the Minnesota Tax Free Portfolio,
the Classic New Jersey Fund invests its assets in the New Jersey Tax Free
Portfolio, the Classic Pennsylvania Fund invests its assets in the Pennsylvania
Tax Free Portfolio, and the Classic Texas Fund invests its assets in the Texas
Tax Free Portfolio. The value of each Fund's investment in its corresponding
Portfolio reflects the Fund's proportionate interest in the net assets of that
Portfolio (1.7%, 4.2%, 2.3%, 2.4%, 4.4%, 0.8%, 0.5%, and 1.6% at July 31, 1995
for the Classic Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund, Classic Connecticut Fund,
Classic Michigan Fund, Classic Minnesota Fund, Classic New Jersey Fund, Classic
Pennsylvania Fund and Classic Texas Fund, respectively). The performance of each
Fund is directly affected by the performance of its corresponding Portfolio. The
financial statements of each Portfolio, including the portfolio of investments,
are included elsewhere in this report and should be read in conjunction with
each Fund's financial statements. The policies are in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles.
A. INVESTMENT VALUATION--Valuation of securities by the Portfolios is discussed
in Note 1 of the Portfolios' Notes to Financial Statements which are included
elsewhere in this report.
B. INCOME--Each Fund's net investment income consists of the Fund's pro rata
share of the net investment income of its corresponding Portfolio, less all
actual and accrued expenses of each Fund determined in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles.
C. FEDERAL TAXES--Each Fund's policy is to comply with the provisions of the
Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to
distribute to shareholders each year all of its taxable and tax-exempt income,
including any net realized gain on investments. Accordingly, no provision for
federal income or excise tax is necessary. At July 31, 1995, the Funds, for
federal income tax purposes, had capital loss carryovers which will reduce
taxable income arising from future net realized gain on investments, if any, to
the extent permitted by the Internal Revenue Code, and thus will reduce the
amount of the distributions to shareholders which would otherwise be necessary
to relieve the Funds of any liability for federal income or excise tax.
The amounts and expiration dates of the capital loss carryovers are as follows:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
FUND AMOUNT EXPIRES
<S> <C> <C>
- -----------------------------------------------------------
Classic Arizona Fund $ 6,850 July 31, 2003
22,323 July 31, 2002
Classic Colorado Fund 10,896 July 31, 2003
18,440 July 31, 2002
Classic Connecticut Fund 4,986 July 31, 2002
Classic Michigan Fund 36,368 July 31, 2003
83,846 July 31, 2002
Classic Minnesota Fund 40,089 July 31, 2003
22,023 July 31, 2002
Classic New Jersey Fund 499 July 31, 2003
15,446 July 31, 2002
Classic Pennsylvania Fund 17,477 July 31, 2003
66,690 July 31, 2002
Classic Texas Fund 11,202 July 31, 2002
</TABLE>
Additionally, at July 31, 1995, net capital losses of $109,209, $116,023,
$101,664, $168,973, $236,478, $151,916, $182,207, and $42,625, for the Classic
Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund, Classic Connecticut Fund, Classic Michigan
Fund, Classic Minnesota Fund, Classic New Jersey Fund, Classic Pennsylvania
Fund, and Classic Texas Fund, respectively, attributable to security
transactions incurred after October 31, 1994, are treated as arising on the
first day of the Fund's next taxable year.
Dividends paid by each Fund from net interest on tax-exempt municipal bonds
allocated from its corresponding Portfolio are not includable by shareholders as
gross income for federal income tax purposes because each Fund and Portfolio
intend to meet certain requirements of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to
regulated investment companies which will enable the Funds to pay
exempt-interest dividends. The portion of such interest, if any, earned on
private activity bonds issued after August 7, 1986, may be considered a tax
preference item to shareholders.
D. DEFERRED ORGANIZATION EXPENSES--Costs incurred by a Fund in connection with
its organization, including registration costs, are being amortized on the
straight-line basis over five years beginning on the date each Fund commenced
operations.
23
<PAGE>
-------
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. DISTRIBUTION COSTS--For book purposes, commissions paid on the sale of Fund
shares and other distribution costs are charged to operations. As a result of a
recent Internal Revenue Service ruling, the Funds changed their tax accounting
for commissions paid from charging the expenses to paid-in capital to charging
the expenses to operations. The change had no effect on either the Funds'
current yield or total return (Notes 2 and 5).
F. OTHER--Investment transactions are accounted for on a trade date basis.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) DISTRIBUTIONS TO SHAREHOLDERS
The net income of a Fund is determined daily and substantially all of the net
income so determined is declared as a dividend to shareholders of record at the
time of declaration. In addition, each Fund declares each day an amount equal to
the excess of tax basis net income over book basis net income, which amount is
reported for financial statement purposes as a distribution in excess of net
investment income. Distributions are paid monthly. Distributions of allocated
realized capital gains, if any, are made at least annually. Shareholders may
reinvest capital gain distributions in additional shares of a Fund at the net
asset value as of the ex-dividend date. Distributions are paid in the form of
additional shares or, at the election of the shareholder, in cash. The Funds
distinguish between distributions on a tax basis and a financial reporting
basis. Generally accepted accounting principles require that only distributions
in excess of tax basis earnings and profits be reported in the financial
statements as a return of capital. Differences in the recognition or
classification of income between the financial statements and tax earnings and
profits which result in temporary over distributions for financial statements
purposes are classified as distributions in excess of net investment income or
accumulated net realized gains. Permanent differences between book and tax
accounting relating to distributions are reclassified to paid-in capital. During
the year ended July 31, 1995, $15,971, $11,553, $17,856, $28,699, $25,207,
$18,312, $18,137 and $4,178 were reclassified from distributions in excess of
net investment income to paid in capital, due to permanent differences between
book and tax accounting for distribution costs for the Classic Arizona Fund,
Classic Colorado Fund, Classic Connecticut Fund, Classic Michigan Fund, Classic
Minnesota Fund, Classic New Jersey Fund, Classic Pennsylvania Fund and Classic
Texas Fund, respectively. Net investment income, net realized gains and net
assets were not affected by these reclassifications.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) SHARES OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST
The Funds' Declaration of Trust permits the Trustees to issue an unlimited
number of full and fractional shares of beneficial interest (without par value).
Transactions in Fund shares were as follows:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC ARIZONA FUND CLASSIC COLORADO FUND
--------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31,
1995 1994* 1995 1994*
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Sales 284,699 450,458 131,906 344,445
Issued to shareholders electing
to receive payments of distributions in Fund
shares 11,797 4,933 9,251 3,407
Redemptions (294,142) (198,453) (182,871) (92,626)
--------- -------- -------- -------
Net increase (decrease) 2,354 256,938 (41,714) 255,226
========= ======== ======== =======
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CONNECTICUT FUND CLASSIC MICHIGAN FUND
--------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31,
1995 1994* 1995 1994*
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Sales 233,930 394,622 91,974 775,309
Issued to shareholders electing
to receive payments of distributions in Fund
shares 17,289 3,916 24,410 13,136
Redemptions (95,969) (51,014) (323,457) (98,104)
------- ------- -------- -------
Net increase (decrease) 155,250 347,524 (207,073) 690,341
======= ======= ======== =======
</TABLE>
* For the period from the start of business December 13, December 10, December
9, and December 7, 1993 for Classic Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund,
Classic Connecticut Fund and Classic Michigan Fund, respectively, to July 31,
1994.
24
<PAGE>
-------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC MINNESOTA FUND CLASSIC NEW JERSEY FUND
--------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31,
1995 1994* 1995 1994*
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Sales 154,778 602,377 71,024 483,105
Issued to shareholders electing
to receive payments of distributions in Fund
shares 8,048 5,274 12,393 5,341
Redemptions (294,858) (79,076) (126,356) (88,920)
-------- ------- -------- -------
Net increase (decrease) (132,032) 528,575 (42,939) 399,526
======== ======= ======= =======
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC PENNSYLVANIA FUND CLASSIC TEXAS FUND
--------------------------- -----------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31, JULY 31,
1995 1994* 1995 1994*
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Sales 76,889 714,451 12,839 137,888
Issued to shareholders electing
to receive payments of distributions in Fund
shares 14,424 11,673 2,544 1,087
Redemptions (318,020) (213,994) (88,591) (14,765)
-------- -------- ------- -------
Net increase (decrease) (226,707) 512,130 (73,208) 124,210
======== ======== ======= =======
</TABLE>
* For the period from the start of business December 9, December 3, December 3,
and December 8, 1993 for Classic Minnesota Fund, Classic New Jersey Fund,
Classic Pennsylvania Fund and Classic Texas Fund, respectively, to July 31,
1994.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATES
Eaton Vance Management (EVM) serves as the Administrator of each Fund, but
receives no compensation. The Portfolios have engaged Boston Management and
Research (BMR), a subsidiary of EVM, to render investment advisory services. See
Note 2 of the Portfolios' Notes to Financial Statements which are included
elsewhere in this report. To enhance the net income of the Funds, $18,453,
$17,169, $22,099, $12,579, $24,179, $22,188, $19,615 and $15,081 of expenses
related to the operation of the Classic Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund,
Classic Connecticut Fund, Classic Michigan Fund, Classic Minnesota Fund, Classic
New Jersey Fund, Classic Pennsylvania Fund and Classic Texas Fund, respectively,
were allocated to EVM. Except as to Trustees of the Funds and the Portfolios who
are not members of EVM's or BMR's organization, officers and Trustees receive
remuneration for their services to each Fund out of such investment adviser fee.
Investors Bank & Trust Company (IBT), an affiliate of EVM, serves as custodian
to the Funds and the Portfolios. Pursuant to the respective custodian
agreements, IBT receives a fee reduced by credits which are determined based on
the average cash balances the Funds or the Portfolios maintain with IBT. Certain
of the officers and Trustees of the Funds and Portfolios are officers and
directors/trustees of the above organizations (Note 5).
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) DISTRIBUTION PLAN
Each Fund has adopted a distribution plan (the Plan) pursuant to Rule 12b-1
under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Effective January 30, 1995 the
Trustees of the Funds adopted an Amended Distribution Plan. The Plans require
the Funds to pay the principal underwriter, Eaton Vance Distributors, Inc.
(EVD), amounts equal to 1/365 of 0.75% of each Funds daily net assets, for
providing ongoing distribution services and facilities to the respective Fund. A
Fund will automatically discontinue payments to EVD during any period in which
there are no outstanding Uncovered Distribution Charges, which are equivalent to
the sum of (i) 6.25% of the aggregate amount received by the Fund for shares
sold plus (ii) distribution fees calculated by applying the rate of 1% over the
prevailing prime rate to the outstanding balance of Uncovered Distribution
Charges of EVD, reduced by the aggregate amount of contingent deferred sales
charges (see Note 6) and amounts theretofore paid to EVD. The amount payable to
EVD with respect to each day is accrued on such day as a liability of each Fund
and, accordingly, reduces the Fund's net assets. For the year ended July 31,
1995, Classic Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund, Classic Connecticut Fund,
Classic Michigan Fund, Classic Minnesota Fund, Classic New Jersey Fund, Classic
Pennsylvania Fund and Classic Texas Fund, paid or accrued $22,532, $16,716,
$28,877, $40,685, $35,916, $26,799, $24,839 and $5,435, respectively, to or
payable to EVD representing 0.75% (annualized) of average daily net assets. At
July 31, 1995, the amount of Uncovered Distribution Charges of EVD calculated
under the Plans for Classic Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund, Classic
Connecticut Fund, Classic Michigan Fund, Classic Minnesota Fund, Classic New
Jersey Fund,
25
<PAGE>
-------
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Classic Pennsylvania Fund, and Classic Texas Fund were approximately $421,000,
$286,000, $346,000, $527,000, $419,000, $295,000, $474,000 and $81,000,
respectively.
In addition, the Plans permit the Funds to make monthly payments of service fees
to the Principal Underwriter, in amounts not expected to exceed 0.25% of each
Fund's average daily net assets for any fiscal year. The Trustees have initially
implemented the Plans by authorizing the Funds to make monthly service fee
payments to the Principal Underwriter in amounts not expected to exceed 0.20% of
each Fund's average daily net assets for any fiscal year. For the year ended
July 31, 1995, Classic Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund, Classic Connecticut
Fund, Classic Michigan Fund, Classic Minnesota Fund, Classic New Jersey Fund,
Classic Pennsylvania Fund and Classic Texas Fund paid or accrued service fees to
or payable to EVD in the amount of $6,008, $4,458, $7,700, $10,781, $9,577,
$7,147, $6,623 and $1,429, respectively. Pursuant to the Amended Distribution
Plan, on sales made prior to January 30, 1995, EVD makes monthly service fee
payments to Authorized Firms in amounts anticipated to be equivalent to 0.20%,
annualized, of the assets maintained in each Fund by their customers. On sales
of shares made on January 30, 1995 and thereafter, EVD currently expects to pay
to an Authorized Firm a service fee at the time of sale equal to 0.20% of the
purchase price of the shares sold by such authorized Firm and monthly payments
of service fees in amounts not expected to exceed 0.20% per annum of the Funds'
average daily net assets based on the value of Fund shares sold by such
authorized Firm and remaining outstanding for at least one year. During the
first year after a purchase of Fund shares, EVD will retain the service fee as
reimbursement for the service fee payment made to the Authorized Firm at the
time of sale. Service fee payments are made for personal services and/or
maintenance of shareholder accounts. Service fees paid to EVD and Authorized
Firms are separate and distinct from the sales commissions and distribution fees
payable by a Fund to EVD, and as such are not subject to automatic
discontinuance when there are no outstanding Uncovered Distribution Charges of
EVD.
Certain of the officers and Trustees of the Funds are officers or directors of
EVD.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) CONTINGENT DEFERRED SALES CHARGES
For shares purchased on or after January 30, 1995, a contingent deferred sales
charge (CDSC) of 1% is imposed on any redemption of Fund shares made within one
year of purchase. Generally, the CDSC is based upon the lower of the net asset
value at date of redemption or date of purchase. No charge is levied on shares
acquired by reinvestment of dividends or capital gains distributions. No CDSC is
levied on shares which have been sold to EVD or its affiliates or to their
respective employees or clients. CDSC charges are paid to EVD to reduce the
amount of Uncovered Distribution Charges calculated under the Funds'
Distribution Plans. CDSC received when no Uncovered Distribution Charges exist
will be credited to the Funds. For the year ended July 31, 1995, EVD received
approximately $600, $200, $50 and $400 of CDSC paid by shareholders of Classic
Arizona Fund, Classic Colorado Fund, Classic Michigan Fund, and Classic
Pennsylvania Fund, respectively.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(7) INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS
Increases and decreases in each Fund's investment in its corresponding Portfolio
for the year ended July 31, 1995 were as follows:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
FUND FUND FUND FUND
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Increases $2,598,994 $1,244,281 $2,158,035 $1,036,188
Decreases 3,513,354 1,716,187 963,488 3,249,657
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND
---------- ---------- ------------ ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Increases $1,717,391 $ 755,436 $ 741,499 $ 153,807
Decreases 3,007,384 1,321,503 3,002,750 845,661
</TABLE>
26
<PAGE>
-------
Independent Auditor's Report
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE TRUSTEES AND SHAREHOLDERS OF EATON VANCE MUNICIPALS TRUST:
We have audited the accompanying statements of assets and liabilities of EV
Classic Arizona Tax Free Fund, EV Classic Colorado Tax Free Fund, EV Classic
Connecticut Tax Free Fund, EV Classic Michigan Tax Free Fund, EV Classic
Minnesota Tax Free Fund, EV Classic New Jersey Tax Free Fund, EV Classic
Pennsylvania Tax Free Fund, and EV Classic Texas Tax Free Fund (the Funds)
(certain of the series of Eaton Vance Municipals Trust) as of July 31, 1995, the
related statements of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of
changes in net assets and the financial highlights for the year ended July 31,
1995 and the period from the start of business to July 31, 1994. These financial
statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Trust's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements and financial highlights based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and financial
highlights are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements and financial highlights referred to
above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the
aforementioned funds of Eaton Vance Municipals Trust at July 31, 1995, the
results of their operations, the changes in their net assets and their financial
highlights for the respective stated periods in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles.
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
AUGUST 25, 1995
27
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Six Months Ended January 31, 1995 (Unaudited)
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
FUND FUND FUND FUND
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 121,342 $ 94,162 $ 101,469 $ 23,920
Net realized gain (loss) on investments ( 192,204) (110,093) (82,348) (15,684)
CHANGE IN UNREALIZED appreciation (depreciation) of
investments 3,260 (14,207) (96,647) (43,173)
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Net increase (decrease) in net assets from
operations $ (67,602) $ (30,138) $ (77,526) $ (34,937)
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Distributions to shareholders (Note 2) --
From net investment income $ (121,342) $ (94,162) $ (101,469) $ (23,920)
In excess of net investment income (12,531) (9,788) (8,088) (2,379)
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Total distributions to shareholders $ (133,873) $ (103,950) $ (109,557) $ (26,299)
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Transactions in shares of beneficial interest
(Note 3) --
Proceeds from sales of shares $1,313,951 $ 554,232 $ 447,118 $ 81,876
Net asset value of shares issued to shareholders in
payment of distributions declared 41,556 61,467 83,577 13,837
Cost of shares redeemed (912,612) (668,634) (1,882,373) (527,587)
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Increase (decrease) in net assets from Fund share
transactions $ 442,895 $ (52,935) $(1,351,678) $ (431,874)
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
Net increase (decrease) in net assets $ 241,420 $(187,023) $(1,538,761) $ (493,110)
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of period 4,951,539 3,716,957 4,701,973 1,146,758
---------- ---------- ----------- ----------
At end of period $5,192,959 $3,529,934 $ 3,163,212 $ 653,648
========== ========== =========== ==========
ACCUMULATED DISTRIBUTIONS IN EXCESS OF NET INVESTMENT
INCOME INCLUDED IN NET ASSETS AT END OF PERIOD $ (1,917) $ (3,972) $ (1,053) $ (1,413)
========== ========== =========== ==========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
16
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
EDUCATION - 4.8%
A1 AA $1,000 Arizona Board of Regents,
Arizona State University,
5.90%, 7/01/09 $ 1,015,710
NR AAA 1,000 City of Glendale,
Thunderbird Graduate
School, CLEE, 7.125%,
7/01/20 1,099,650
A1 AA 1,250 Arizona Board of Regents,
University of Arizona,
6.25%, 6/01/11 1,283,100
NR NR 2,000 Arizona Educational Loan
Marketing Corporation,
(AMT) 6.30%, 12/01/08 1,921,460
A NR 1,500 Student Loan Acquisition
Authority of Arizona,
(AMT) 7.625%, 5/01/10 1,630,230
------------
$ 6,950,150
------------
ESCROWED - 6.2%
Aaa AA $2,500 Arizona Transportation
Board Highway, 6.50%,
7/01/11 $ 2,797,850
Aaa AAA 7,500 Maricopa County, Single
Family Mortgage, 0%,
2/01/16 2,145,825
NR AA 2,500 City of Phoenix, Street &
Highway User, 6.25%,
7/01/11 2,696,950
Baa1 AAA 630 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 7.125%, 7/01/14 705,039
NR NR 500 City of Scottsdale,
Westminster Village,
Multifamily Housing,
10.00%, 6/01/17 565,310
------------
$ 8,910,974
------------
GENERAL OBLIGATION - 7.9%
Aa AA+ $1,500 City of Phoenix, 6.375%,
7/01/13 $ 1,556,085
Aa AA+ 1,000 City of Phoenix, 5.55%,
7/01/09 1,001,860
Aa AA+ 3,000 City of Phoenix, 5.10%,
7/01/13 2,774,070
Aa1 AA+ 1,000 City of Scottsdale, 5.50%,
7/01/12 957,500
NR A 2,000 City of Phoenix, Tatum
Ranch Community, 6.875%,
7/01/16 2,106,600
Aa AA+ 1,000 City of Tempe, 5.25%,
7/01/15 925,490
Aa AA 1,300 Scottsdale Unified School
District No. 48 of
Maricopa County, 4.60%,
7/01/11 1,146,665
Baa1 A 1,000 Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, 5.75%, 7/01/16 953,220
------------
$ 11,421,490
------------
HOSPITALS - 3.2%
NR BBB $1,130 Arizona Health Facilities
Authority, Phoenix
Memorial Hospital, 8.125%,
6/01/12 $ 1,202,376
NR BBB 1,250 Arizona Health Facilities
Authority, Phoenix
Memorial Hospital, 8.20%,
6/01/21 (2) 1,331,413
Baa BB+ 1,000 Maricopa County, Sun
Health Corporation,
8.125%, 4/01/12 1,065,980
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NR NR 915 City of Winslow, Winslow
Memorial Hospital Project,
9.50%, 6/01/22 1,003,535
------------
$ 4,603,304
------------
HOUSING - 5.7%
NR A $2,000 Maricopa County, Laguna
Point Apartments,
Multifamily Housing,
6.75%, 7/01/09 $ 1,990,440
NR AAA 2,775 City of Phoenix, Chris
Ridge Village Project, FHA
Insured Mortgage Loan,
6.80%, 11/01/25 2,812,546
NR AA 1,000 City of Phoenix, Woodstone
and Silver Springs
Apartments, Multifamily
Housing, (Asset Guaranty),
6.25%, 4/01/23 989,500
Aaa NR 1,500 City of Phoenix, Meadow
Glen Apartments,
Multifamily Housing, (GNMA
Collateralized) 5.80%,
8/20/28 1,367,325
NR AAA 1,000 City of Tempe, Multifamily
Housing, Quadrangle
Village Apartments, FHA
Insured Mortgage Loan,
6.25%, 6/01/26 982,450
------------
$ 8,142,261
------------
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
REVENUE / IDB - 3.7%
A1 NR $1,000 City of Casa Grande,
Pollution Control,
Frito-Lay Inc., 6.60%,
12/01/10 $ 1,059,800
A2 A 4,500 Greenlee County, Pollution
Control, Phelps Dodge
Corporation, 5.45%,
6/01/09 4,318,155
------------
$ 5,377,955
------------
INSURED GENERAL OBLIGATION - 8.6%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Peoria Unified School
District No. 11 of
Maricopa County, (MBIA)
6.40%, 7/01/10 $ 1,051,570
Aaa AAA 1,300 Alhambra Elementary School
District No. 68 of
Maricopa County, (AMBAC)
5.50%, 7/01/07 1,322,776
Aaa AAA 1,000 Alhambra Elementary School
District No. 68 of
Maricopa County, (AMBAC)
5.625%, 7/01/13 997,140
Aaa AAA 1,000 Alhambra Elementary School
District No. 68 of
Maricopa County, (AMBAC)
5.125%, 7/01/13 921,170
Aaa AAA 1,000 Paradise Valley Unified
School District No. 69 of
Maricopa County, (AMBAC),
5.00%, 7/01/09 929,690
</TABLE>
33
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARIZONA TAX FREE PORTFOLIO (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED GENERAL OBLIGATION -
(CONTINUED)
Aaa AAA 1,000 Chandler Unified School
District No. 80 of
Maricopa County, (FGIC)
6.40%, 7/01/10 1,047,450
Aaa AAA 1,000 Pima County, School
District No. 1, Tucson
Project, (FGIC) 5.40%,
7/01/13 949,340
Aaa AAA 1,750 Pima County, School
District No. 1, Tucson
Project, (FGIC) 5.875%,
7/01/14 1,742,965
Aaa AAA 1,000 Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, (FSA) 7/01/20 (1) 963,790
Aaa AAA 1,500 Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, (AMBAC) 7/01/15 (1) 1,492,485
Aaa AAA 1,000 Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, (FSA) 7/01/22 (1) 1,003,110
------------
$ 12,421,486
------------
INSURED HOSPITALS - 13.1%
Aaa AAA $2,000 Maricopa County, Hospital
District No.1, (FGIC)
6.125%, 6/01/15 (2) $ 2,021,080
Aaa AAA 3,500 Maricopa County, Catholic
Healthcare West, (MBIA)
5.625%, 7/01/23 3,336,655
Aaa AAA 2,000 Maricopa County, Samaritan
Health, (MBIA) 7.00%,
12/01/16 2,280,640
Aaa AAA 2,000 Mohave County, Hospital
District No.1, Kingman
Regional Medical Center,
(FGIC) 6.50%, 6/01/15 2,084,440
Aaa AAA 1,500 Pima County, Tucson
Medical Center, (MBIA)
6.375%, 4/01/12 1,550,700
Aaa AAA 3,500 Pima County, Tucson
Medical Center, (MBIA)
5.00%, 4/01/15 3,098,795
Aaa AAA 1,000 Pima County, Carondelet
Health Care Corporation,
(MBIA) 5.25%, 7/01/11 938,350
Aaa AAA 1,000 Pima County, Carondelet
Health Care Corporation,
(MBIA) 5.25%, 7/01/12 930,980
Aaa AAA 2,000 University of Arizona
Medical Center
Corporation, (MBIA) 5.00%,
7/01/13 1,802,480
Aaa AAA 1,000 University of Arizona
Medical Center
Corporation, (MBIA) 5.00%,
7/01/21 869,300
------------
$ 18,913,420
------------
INSURED HOUSING - 1.3%
Aaa AAA $1,975 City of Sierra Vista,
Mountain View Apartments,
FHA Insured Mortgage,
(MBIA) 5.75%, 1/01/24 $ 1,849,331
------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED UTILITIES - 5.9%
Aaa AAA $4,000 Navajo County, Pollution
Control, Arizona Public
Service Co., (AMBAC)
5.50%, 8/15/28 $ 3,687,000
Aaa AAA 3,500 Pima County, Irvington
Power Project, (FSA)
7.25%, 7/15/10 (2) 3,842,300
Aaa AAA 1,000 Arizona State Power
Authority, Hoover Uprating
Project, (MBIA) 5.25%,
10/01/17 909,770
------------
$ 8,439,070
------------
INSURED MISCELLANEOUS - 0.7%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Maricopa County Stadium
District, (MBIA) 5.50%,
7/01/13 $ 956,070
------------
INSURED SPECIAL TAX - 1.3%
Aaa AAA $1,750 City of Phoenix, Civic
Improvement Excise Tax,
(MBIA) 6.60%, 7/01/08 $ 1,895,793
------------
INSURED TRANSPORTATION - 0.7%
Aaa AAA $1,000 City of Tucson, Junior
Lien Street and Highway,
(MBIA) 5.50%, 7/01/12 $ 952,370
------------
INSURED WATER & SEWER - 1.4%
Aaa AAA $1,000 City of Chandler, Water
and Sewer, (FGIC) 6.25%,
7/01/13 $ 1,024,610
Aaa AAA 1,200 City of Phoenix, Civic
Improvement Wastewater
Systems, (MBIA) 5.00%,
7/01/18 1,058,340
------------
$ 2,082,950
------------
TRANSPORTATION - 6.7%
Aa AA $1,000 State of Arizona,
Transportation Board &
Highway, 5.00%, 7/01/10 $ 928,360
Aa AA 2,000 State of Arizona,
Transportation Board &
Highway, 5.10%, 7/01/11 1,851,780
Baa1 A 1,000 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority,
5.25%, 7/01/20 881,340
Baa1 A 1,000 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority,
5.25%, 7/01/21 879,370
</TABLE>
34
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
TRANSPORTATION - (CONTINUED)
A1 A+ 2,250 City of Tucson, Arizona,
Senior Lien Street and
Highway, 5.50%, 7/01/09 2,173,523
NR BBB 3,000 Guam Airport Authority,
(AMT) 6.70%, 10/01/23 2,999,610
------------
$ 9,713,983
------------
UTILITIES - 20.3%
Baa2 BBB $1,500 Coconino County, Pollution
Control, Nevada Power Co.,
7.125%, 10/01/06 $ 1,502,730
Ba2 BB 2,500 Maricopa County, Pollution
Control, Public Service
Company of New Mexico,
Palo Verde Project,
6.375%, 8/15/23 2,376,600
Baa1 BBB 5,300 Navajo County, Pollution
Control, Arizona Public
Service Co., 5.875%,
8/15/28 4,932,975
NR AAA 1,000 Mohave County, Citizens
Utilities Company Project,
(AMT) 5.80%, 11/15/28 958,740
A A+ 1,000 Puerto Rico Telephone
Authority, 1/01/20 (1) 1,009,540
A1 AA- 1,000 Central Arizona Water
Conservation District,
Central Arizona Project,
5.50%, 11/01/09 989,209
NR BBB 1,200 Guam Power Authority,
6.30%, 10/01/12 1,193,652
NR BBB 1,250 Guam Power Authority,
6.30%, 10/01/22 1,218,162
Baa1 A- 1,500 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 7.00%, 7/01/07 1,603,410
Baa1 A- 5,000 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 5.00%, 7/01/12 4,429,250
Baa1 A- 370 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 7.125%, 7/01/14 401,210
Aa AA 1,750 Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement
and Power District, Salt
River Project Electric
System, 5.50%, 1/01/28 1,600,008
Aa AA 3,500 Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement
and Power District, Salt
River Project Electric
System, 5.50%, 1/01/25 3,227,735
Aa AA 1,000 Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement
and Power District, Salt
River Project Electric
System, 6.25%, 1/01/27 1,012,300
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aa AA 1,000 Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement
and Power District, Salt
River Project Electric
System, 5.25%, 1/01/13 917,570
Aa AA 2,000 Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement
and Power District, Salt
River Project Electric
System, 5.25%, 1/01/19 1,796,320
------------
$ 29,169,411
------------
WATER & SEWER - 8.5%
Aa AA+ $2,000 State of Arizona,
Wastewater Management
Authority, 6.80%, 7/01/11
(2) $ 2,163,140
A1 A 1,100 City of Phoenix, Water
System, 5.00%, 7/01/18 966,405
A1 A 5,000 City of Phoenix, Water
System, 4.75%, 7/01/23 4,140,550
A1 AA- 1,000 City of Phoenix, Water
System, 5.40%, 7/01/14 942,330
A1 A+ 1,000 City of Tucson, Water
System, 6.50%, 7/01/16 1,046,420
A1 A+ 1,000 City of Tucson, Water
System, 5.50%, 7/01/08 1,019,410
A1 A+ 1,000 City of Tucson, Water
System, 5.50%, 7/01/09 989,410
A1 A+ 1,000 City of Tucson, Water
System, 5.50%, 7/01/10 979,050
------------
$ 12,246,715
------------
TOTAL TAX-EXEMPT
INVESTMENTS (IDENTIFIED
COST, $140,218,111) $144,046,733
============
<FN>
(1) The above designated securities have been issued as inverse floater bonds.
(2) Security has been segregated to cover margin requirements for open financial
futures contracts.
</TABLE>
The Portfolio invests primarily in debt securities issued by Arizona
municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their
obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or
municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic
developments, at July 31, 1995, 36.6% of the securities in the portfolio of
investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial guaranty assurance
agencies. The aggregate percentage by financial institution ranges from 0.9% to
16.3% of total investments.
See notes to financial statements
35
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colorado Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
EDUCATION - 2.0%
A1 A+ $1,000 City of Colorado Springs,
Colorado College Project,
5.125%, 6/01/16 $ 902,140
-----------
ESCROWED - 1.6%
Aaa AAA $4,000 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, Liberty Heights
Project, (FSA) 0%, 7/15/24 $ 538,160
NR AAA 150 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority,
6.50%, 7/01/22 169,296
-----------
$ 707,456
-----------
GENERAL OBLIGATION - 9.4%
A NR $ 500 City of Aspen, 5.625%,
4/15/14 $ 467,330
Aa AA 1,000 City and County of Denver,
5.10%, 9/01/09 938,710
Aa AA 1,000 Boulder and Gilpin
Counties, Boulder Valley
School District, 6.30%,
12/01/13 1,032,600
NR A 750 Larimer, Weld & Boulder
Counties, Thompson School
District, 6.05%, 12/15/08 770,422
Baa1 A 1,000 Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, 5.75%, 7/01/15 959,900
NR NR 100 Virgin Islands Public
Finance Authority, 7.25%,
10/01/18 103,155
-----------
$ 4,272,117
-----------
HOSPITALS - 10.4%
Baa1 BBB+ $1,250 Boulder County, Longmont
United Hospital, 5.875%,
12/01/20 $ 1,160,750
Baa BBB 2,050 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, Rocky Mountain
Adventist Healthcare,
6.625%, 2/01/13 1,999,304
A NR 250 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, Craig Hospital,
5.375%, 12/01/13 228,340
A NR 500 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, Craig Hospital,
5.50%, 12/01/21 449,450
Baa1 BBB+ 250 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, Swedish Medical
Center, 6.80%, 1/01/23 252,050
NR BBB- 650 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, National Jewish
Center, 6.875%, 2/15/12 628,524
-----------
$ 4,718,418
-----------
HOUSING - 11.6%
NR NR $ 350 Lake Creek Affordable
Housing Corporation,
Multifamily Housing, 8.00%,
12/01/23 $ 352,786
NR AAA 1,000 City of Lakewood, Multi
Family Housing FHA Insured
Mortgage Loan, (AMT) 6.65%,
10/01/25 1,004,010
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aa NR 1,975 Colorado Housing and
Finance Authority, Single
Family Access Program,
7.90%, 12/01/24 2,163,810
Aa NR 990 Colorado Housing and
Finance Authority, Single
Family Access Program,
8.00%, 12/01/24 (3) 1,093,682
Aa NR 600 Colorado Housing and
Finance Authority, Single
Family Housing, (AMT)
7.65%, 12/01/25 (2) 651,786
-----------
$ 5,266,074
-----------
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
REVENUE - 3.4%
A2 NR $1,750 Puerto Rico Pollution
Control, American Home
Products Corporation,
5.10%, 12/01/18 $ 1,541,488
-----------
INSURED EDUCATION - 2.1%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Board of Trustees of the
State Colleges in Colorado,
Adams State College of
Colorado Project, (MBIA)
5.70%, 5/15/14 $ 976,260
-----------
INSURED GENERAL OBLIGATION - 11.4%
Aaa AAA $ 500 City and County of Denver
School District #1, (MBIA)
5.125%, 12/01/12 $ 455,225
Aaa AAA 1,000 Douglas and Elbert
Counties, Douglas County
School District, (MBIA)
6.40%, 12/15/11 1,050,140
Aaa AAA 1,750 Eagle, Garfield & Routt
Counties, School District
No. RE 50J, (FGIC) 6.30%,
12/01/12 1,827,648
Aaa AAA 1,000 Poudre School District R-1
of Larimer County, (MBIA)
6.50%, 12/15/11 1,060,090
Aaa AAA 750 Pueblo County School
District No.70, Pueblo
Rural, (AMBAC) 6.40%,
12/01/14 778,703
-----------
$ 5,171,806
-----------
INSURED HOSPITALS - 15.0%
Aaa AAA $2,500 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, Sisters of
Charity, (MBIA) 5.25%,
5/15/14 $ 2,292,825
Aaa AAA 2,000 Colorado Health Facilities
Authority, Boulder
Community Hospital, (MBIA)
5.875%, 10/01/23 1,942,220
Aaa AAA 1,000 Colorado Springs Hospital,
(MBIA) 6.00%, 12/15/24 980,970
Aaa AAA 500 City and County of Denver,
Childrens Hospital, (FGIC)
6.00%, 10/01/15 504,490
</TABLE>
36
<PAGE>
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connecticut Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
EDUCATION - 10.8%
Baa BBB $1,000 Connecticut HEFA,
University of Hartford,
6.75%, 7/01/12 $ 975,350
Baa BBB 5,500 Connecticut HEFA,
University of Hartford,
6.80%, 7/01/22 5,302,660
NR BBB- 6,175 Connecticut HEFA,
Quinnipiac College, 6.00%,
7/01/23 5,497,294
NR BBB- 1,000 Connecticut HEFA, Sacred
Heart University, 6.80%,
7/01/12 1,045,400
NR A- 1,000 Connecticut HEFA, Sacred
Heart University, 5.80%,
7/01/23 842,940
NR A 1,125 Connecticut HEFA, Taft
School, 5.40%, 7/01/20 1,011,476
Aaa AAA 6,000 Connecticut HEFA, Yale
University, 5.929%,
6/10/30 5,929,680
------------
$ 20,604,800
------------
ESCROWED TO MATURITY - 2.4%
NR AA- $ 650 State of Connecticut
Government Obligations
Bonds, 6.875%, 7/15/10 $ 729,775
NR AAA 800 Connecticut Special Tax
Obligation Bonds,
Transportation
Infrastructure Purposes,
6.75%, 6/01/11 906,304
A1 AA- 645 Connecticut Special Tax
Obligation Bonds,
Transportation
Infrastructure Purposes,
6.50%, 7/01/09 706,475
A1 AA- 300 Amity RSD No. 5 Bonds,
6.80%, 6/15/08 326,166
Baa BBB 1,630 City of Stratford,
Government Obligations
Bonds, 7.30%, 3/01/12 1,869,561
------------
$ 4,538,281
------------
GENERAL OBLIGATION - 6.1%
Aa1 NR $ 350 City of Avon, 4.60%,
1/15/07 $ 327,159
Aa NR 525 Town of Guilford, 4.75%,
11/15/10 476,017
Aa NR 525 Town of Guilford, 4.75%,
11/15/11 471,466
A AA- 2,000 City of Bridgeport,
6.125%, 3/01/05 2,073,380
Aa AA- 1,750 State of Connecticut,
Capital Appreciation
Bonds, 0%, 11/01/09 781,515
AA AA- 1,000 State of Connecticut,
5.50%, 3/15/10 983,190
AA AA- 500 State of Connecticut,
5.50%, 3/15/11 491,235
Aa AA 1,270 City of Danbury, 4.50%,
2/01/14 1,062,634
Aa1 NR 650 City of Farmington, 5.70%,
1/15/11 657,306
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NR BBB 500 Government of Guam, 5.40%,
11/15/18 431,735
Aa1 AA+ 925 City of Norwalk Maritime
Center Project Bonds,
6.05%, 2/01/09 952,574
Baa1 A 2,000 Puerto Rico PBA Bonds,
5.50%, 7/01/21 1,832,480
NR NR 1,000 Virgin Islands PFA Revenue
Bonds, 7.25%, 10/01/18 1,031,550
------------
$ 11,572,241
------------
HEALTH CARE (NON-HOSPITAL) - 12.5%
A1 AA- $ 600 Connecticut HEFA, Nursing
Home Program NHP (Noble
Horizons), 6.00%, 11/01/22 $ 586,554
A1 AA- 1,000 Connecticut HEFA, NHP
(Jewish Home-Fairfield),
6.25%, 11/01/20 1,008,720
A1 AA- 655 Connecticut HEFA, NHP (St.
Camillus), 6.25%, 11/01/18 661,766
A1 AA- 3,250 Connecticut HEFA, NHP (St.
Joseph's Manor) 6.25%,
11/01/16 3,283,573
A1 AA- 1,365 Connecticut HEFA, NHP
(Sharon Healthcare) 6.25%,
11/01/14 1,385,762
Aa3 NR 9,000 Connecticut Development
Authority Health Care
Bonds (Duncaster), 6.75%,
9/01/15 9,301,230
A1 AA- 720 Connecticut HEFA, NHP
(Highland View), 7.00%,
11/01/07 787,975
A1 AA- 335 Connecticut HEFA, NHP
(Wadsworth Glen), 7.00%,
11/01/07 366,627
A1 AA- 2,000 Connecticut HEFA, NHP
(Wadsworth Glen), 7.50%,
11/01/16 2,210,800
A1 AA- 3,000 Connecticut HEFA, NHP
(Windsor), 7.125%,
11/01/14 3,254,820
NR A- 1,000 Puerto Rico I. M. E. (Dr.
Pila Hospital), (FHA)
7.85%, 8/01/28 1,078,190
------------
$ 23,926,017
------------
HOSPITALS - 6.0%
NR A- $3,770 Connecticut HEFA, William
W. Backus Hospital,
6.375%, 7/01/22 $ 3,748,096
Baa1 NR 9,150 Connecticut HEFA, Griffin
Hospital, 5.75%, 7/01/23 7,814,009
------------
$ 11,562,105
------------
HOUSING - 8.2%
Aa AA $ 100 Connecticut HFA Mortgage
Revenue Bonds (MRB),
7.40%, 11/15/99 $ 102,965
</TABLE>
38
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
HOUSING - (CONTINUED)
Aa AA 1,400 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
7.20%, 11/15/01 1,473,556
Aa AA 200 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
7.00%, 11/15/09 207,336
Aa AA 6,200 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
6.70%, 11/15/12 6,336,524
Aa AA 250 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
6.55%, 11/15/13 252,910
Aa AA 1,000 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
5.85%, 11/15/16 955,420
Aa AA 120 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
7.625%, 11/15/17 123,988
Aa AA 1,700 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
6.35%, 5/15/17 1,674,177
Aa AA 2,500 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
6.60%, 11/15/23 2,511,700
Aa AA 2,000 Connecticut HFA, MRB,
6.75%, 11/15/23 2,030,000
------------
$ 15,668,576
------------
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT/POLLUTION
CONTROL REVENUES - 3.0%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Connecticut Development
Authority (Pfizer Inc.),
6.55%, 2/15/13 $ 1,071,700
Aa AA- 2,000 Connecticut Development
Authority (Economic
Development Projects),
Revenue Bonds, 6.00%,
11/15/08 2,066,960
A1 A+ 2,000 Connecticut Development
Authority (New England
Power Company Project),
7.25%, 10/15/15 2,142,580
Baa1 A 500 Puerto Rico Port Authority
(American Airlines),
6.30%, 6/01/23 485,275
------------
$ 5,766,515
------------
INSURED AIRPORTS - 4.9%
Aaa AAA $8,200 State of Connecticut
Airport Revenue Bonds,
Bradley International
Airport, (FGIC), 7.65%,
10/01/12 $ 9,315,364
------------
INSURED COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY - 3.9%
Aaa AAA $ 725 Connecticut HEFA,
Fairfield University
(MBIA), 5.00%, 7/01/18 $ 636,129
Aaa AAA 1,200 Connecticut HEFA,
Connecticut College
(MBIA), 6.625%, 7/01/11 1,272,948
Aaa AAA 2,000 Connecticut HEFA, Trinity
College (MBIA), 6.00%,
7/01/22 2,003,960
Aaa AAA 1,555 Connecticut HEFA, Choate
Rosemary College (MBIA),
6.80%, 7/01/15 (1) 1,683,661
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aaa AAA 750 Connecticut HEFA, Loomis
Chafee (MBIA), 6.00%,
7/01/15 760,793
Aaa AAA 1,000 Connecticut HEFA, Loomis
Chafee (MBIA), 6.00%,
7/01/25 1,005,850
------------
$ 7,363,341
------------
INSURED MISCELLANEOUS - 0.8%
Aaa AAA $1,750 Connecticut Municipal
Electric Energy
Cooperative Bonds (MBIA),
5.00%, 1/01/18 $ 1,549,520
------------
INSURED GOVERNMENT OBLIGATIONS - 4.3%
Aaa AAA $1,220 Town of Bethel, (MBIA),
6.50%, 2/15/09 $ 1,340,243
Aaa AAA 2,000 City of Waterbury, Tax
Revenue Bonds (FGIC),
5.375%, 4/15/08 1,984,380
Aaa AAA 740 Town of Stratford, (MBIA),
6.60%, 3/01/11 800,924
Aaa AAA 1,000 City of New Britain,
(MBIA), 6.00%, 3/01/12 1,026,430
Aaa AAA 1,000 Town of Plainfield,
(MBIA), 6.375%, 8/01/11 1,045,430
Aaa AAA 2,120 Puerto Rico Public
Improvement Bonds (MBIA),
5.25%, 7/01/18 1,955,446
------------
$ 8,152,853
------------
INSURED HEALTHCARE - 1.3%
A1 AA- $1,735 Connecticut HEFA, NHP (St.
Joseph's Living Center),
(AMBAC), 5.10%, 11/01/19 $ 1,528,604
A1 AA- 1,030 Connecticut HEFA, NHP (St.
Joseph's Learning Center)
(AMBAC), 5.00%, 11/01/09 951,699
------------
$ 2,480,303
------------
INSURED HOSPITAL - 10.0%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Connecticut HEFA,
Bridgeport Hospital
(MBIA), 6.625%, 7/01/18 $ 1,051,740
Aaa AAA 6,750 Connecticut HEFA, St.
Francis Hospital (FGIC),
5.00%, 7/01/23 5,808,172
Aaa AAA 1,500 Connecticut HEFA, Lawrence
and Memorial Hospital
(MBIA), 5.00%, 7/01/13 1,345,740
Aaa AAA 5,750 Connecticut HEFA, Lawrence
and Memorial Hospital
(MBIA), 5.00%, 7/01/22 4,959,203
Aaa AAA 1,000 Connecticut HEFA, Hospital
of St. Raphael (AMBAC),
6.50%, 7/01/11 1,080,700
Aaa AAA 1,500 Connecticut HEFA, Hospital
of St. Raphael (AMBAC),
6.625%, 7/01/14 1,575,585
</TABLE>
39
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONNECTICUT TAX FREE PORTFOLIO (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED HOSPITAL - (CONTINUED)
Aaa AAA 2,000 Connecticut HEFA, Yale-New
Haven Hospital (MBIA),
6.50%, 7/01/12 2,093,380
Aaa AAA 1,200 Connecticut HEFA, Yale-New
Haven Hospital (MBIA),
7.10%, 7/01/25 1,297,800
------------
$ 19,212,320
------------
INSURED SOLID WASTE - 0.7%
Aaa AAA $1,275 Connecticut Resources
Recovery Authority Mid-
Connecticut System Bonds
(MBIA), 7.30%, 10/15/12 $ 1,343,161
------------
INSURED SPECIAL TAX - 0.7%
State of Connecticut
Special Tax Obligation
Bonds (FGIC), 5.00%,
10/01/13 $ 1,342,950
AAA $1,500
------------
INSURED WATER AND SEWER - 3.3%
Aaa AAA $1,750 Connecticut Development
Authority Water Facilities
Bonds, Connecticut Water
Company (AMBAC), (AMT),
5.875%, 9/01/22 $ 1,689,048
Aaa AAA 1,150 Connecticut Development
Authority Water Facilities
Bonds, Connecticut Water
Company (AMBAC), (AMT),
5.75%, 7/01/28 1,086,853
Aaa AAA 3,460 South Central Connecticut,
Regional Water Authority
Bonds (FGIC), 5.75%,
8/01/12 3,445,122
------------
$ 6,221,023
------------
SOLID WASTE - 8.1%
A NR $2,500 Bristol Resource Recovery
Facility Operating
Committee, (Ogden Martin
Systems), 6.50%, 7/01/14 $ 2,570,800
A2 A+ 1,000 Connecticut Resources
Recovery Authority
(American REF-FUEL
Company), (AMT), 8.10%,
11/15/15 1,104,660
A2 A+ 450 Connecticut Resources
Recovery Authority
(American REF-FUEL
Company), (AMT), 8.00%,
11/15/15 495,760
A2 A+ 4,250 Connecticut Resources
Recovery Authority
(American REF-FUEL
Company), (AMT), 6.45%,
11/15/22 4,252,805
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NR A 7,970 Eastern Connecticut
Resource Recovery
Authority, (Wheelabrator
Lisbon), 5.50%, 1/01/20 7,000,609
------------
$ 15,424,634
------------
SPECIAL TAX - 2.7%
A1 AA- $1,000 State of Connecticut STOB,
4.40%, 10/01/04 $ 948,510
A1 AA- 1,000 State of Connecticut STOB,
5.40%, 9/01/10 968,880
A1 AA- 3,180 State of Connecticut STOB,
6.125%, 9/01/12 3,273,460
------------
Aaa $ 5,190,850
------------
STUDENT LOANS - 1.4%
A1 NR $ 455 Connecticut Higher
Education Supplemental
Loan Authority Revenue
Bonds (CHESLA) (AMT),
7.375%, 11/15/05 $ 477,313
A1 NR 1,350 CHESLA Revenue Bonds
(AMT), 6.20%, 11/15/09 1,355,279
A1 NR 910 CHESLA Revenue Bonds
(AMT), 7.50%, 11/15/10 960,141
------------
$ 2,792,733
------------
TRANSPORTATION - 2.4%
Baa1 A $4,465 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority
Bonds, 5.50%, 7/01/15 $ 4,172,900
Baa1 A 500 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority
Bonds, 5.50%, 7/01/15 467,290
------------
$ 4,640,190
------------
UTILITY - 4.3%
NR BBB $1,100 Guam Power Authority
Revenue Bonds, 6.625%,
10/01/14 $ 1,115,015
NR BBB 3,625 Guam Power Authority
Revenue Bonds, 6.30%,
10/01/22 3,532,671
NR NR 3,500 Virgin Islands Water and
Power Authority, Electric
Revenue System Bonds,
7.40%, 7/01/11 3,646,055
------------
$ 8,293,741
------------
WATER & SEWER REVENUE - 2.2%
Aa AA $1,250 State of Connecticut Clean
Water Fund Revenue Bonds,
6.00%, 10/01/12 $ 1,286,438
Aa AA 1,000 State of Connecticut Clean
Water Fund Revenue Bonds,
5.80%, 6/01/16 996,310
</TABLE>
40
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
WATER & SEWER REVENUE - (CONTINUED)
NR A+ 2,225 Connecticut Development
Authority Water Facilities
(Stamford Water Company),
5.30%, 9/01/28 2,010,243
------------
$ 4,292,991
------------
TOTAL TAX-EXEMPT
INVESTMENTS (IDENTIFIED
COST, $192,808,845) $191,254,509
============
<FN>
(1) Security has been segregated to cover margin requirements for open financial
futures contracts.
</TABLE>
The Portfolio primarily invests in debt securities issued by Connecticut
municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their
obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or
municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic
developments, at July 31, 1995, 30.4% of the securities in the portfolio of
investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial institutions and
financial guaranty assurance agencies. The aggregate percentage by financial
institution ranged from 0.6% to 14.2% of total investments.
See notes to financial statements
41
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michigan Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
EDUCATION - 1.1%
NR BBB- $2,000 Puerto Rico Polytechnic
University, 6.50%, 8/01/24 $ 1,999,980
------------
ELECTRIC UTILITIES - 2.6%
NR BBB $1,000 Guam Power Authority,
6.625%, 10/01/14 $ 1,013,650
Baa1 BBB+ 500 Michigan South Central
Power Agency Supply
System, 6.75%, 11/01/10 517,475
Baa1 BBB 1,790 Monroe County, Michigan
PCR Detroit Edison
Project, 7.75%, 12/01/19 1,946,320
Baa1 A- 1,000 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 5.00%, 7/01/12 885,850
Baa1 A- 365 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 7.125%, 7/01/14 395,788
------------
$ 4,759,083
------------
ESCROWED - 6.2%
NR AA $ 940 Detroit City School
District, Michigan School
Building and Site, 7.15%,
5/01/11 $ 1,074,185
Aaa AAA 1,000 Lake Orion, Michigan
School District U.T.G.O.,
7.00%, (AMBAC) 5/01/20 1,171,550
Aaa AAA 750 Michigan HFA, Oakwood
Hospital (FGIC), 7.20%,
11/01/15 855,308
Aaa AAA 3,500 Monroe County, Michigan
EDC Mercy Memorial
Hospital (MBIA), 7.00%,
9/01/21 4,003,930
NR AA 955 Okemos Public Schools,
Michigan School Building
and Site, 6.90%, 5/01/11 1,079,398
Baa1 AAA 635 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 7.125%, 7/01/14 710,635
NR NR 2,400 Wyandotte School District,
Michigan School Building
and Site, 6.90%, 5/01/16 2,712,624
------------
$ 11,607,630
------------
GENERAL OBLIGATIONS - 5.2%
Aa AA $ 500 Avondale School District,
Michigan School Building
and Site, 6.75%, 5/01/14 $ 524,220
Aa AA 2,550 Clintondale Community
Schools, Michigan 6.75%,
5/01/24 2,686,093
Ba1 BBB 500 Detroit City, Michigan,
8.00%, 4/01/11 543,185
Ba1 BBB 2,925 Detroit City, Michigan,
6.35%, 4/01/14 2,877,615
A AA 500 East Lancing Building
Authority, Michigan,
7.00%, 10/01/16 527,070
Aa AA 1,350 Martin Public Schools,
Michigan School Building
and Site, 6.60%, 5/01/20 1,400,450
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aa AA 1,000 Mattawan Consolidated
Schools, Michigan, 6.40%,
5/01/09 1,044,760
------------
$ 9,603,393
------------
HOSPITAL - 12.9%
A A $ 450 Michigan HFA Detroit
Medical Center Obligated
Group, 7.50%, 8/15/11 $ 487,651
A A 4,550 Michigan HFA Detroit
Medical Center Obligated
Group, 5.50%, 8/15/23 3,898,941
A A 5,500 Michigan HFA Detroit
Medical Center Obligated
Group, 6.25%, 8/15/13 5,309,810
A A 1,000 Michigan HFA Detroit
Medical Center Obligated
Group, 6.50%, 8/15/18 978,950
Aa AA 250 Michigan HFA Henry Ford
Continuing Care
Corporation, 6.75%,
7/01/11 264,555
A1 NR 2,970 Michigan HFA McLaren
Obligated Group, 5.375%,
10/15/13 2,659,843
A1 NR 6,000 Michigan HFA McLaren
Obligated Group, 4.50%,
10/15/21 4,456,559
A A 4,130 Michigan HFA MidMichigan
Obligated Group, 6.625%,
6/01/10 4,215,574
Aa AA 1,750 Royal Oak, Michigan
William Beaumont Hospital,
6.75%, 1/01/20 1,815,818
------------
$ 24,087,701
------------
HOUSING - 1.9%
NR A+ $1,500 Michigan HDA Rental
Housing (AMT), 7.15%,
4/01/10 $ 1,587,150
NR A+ 1,000 Michigan HDA Rental
Housing, 7.10%, 4/01/21 1,038,320
NR AA+ 895 Michigan HDA Single Family
Mortgage, 6.95%, 12/01/20 920,472
------------
$ 3,545,942
------------
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE/
POLLUTION CONTROL REVENUE - 6.1%
Baa1 BBB $3,970 Dickinson, MI PCR-Champion
International, 5.85%,
10/01/18 $ 3,753,436
Baa1 BBB 3,000 Michigan Job Development
Authority PCR-General
Motors, 5.55%, 10/01/09
(1) 2,877,750
A3 BBB+ 3,750 Michigan Strategic Fund-
General Motors, 6.20%,
9/01/20 3,702,788
NR BBB+ 500 Michigan Strategic
Fund-KMart Corporation,
6.80%, 6/15/07 513,520
</TABLE>
42
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE/
POLLUTION CONTROL REVENUE - (CONTINUED)
NR BBB 530 Richmond, Michigan EDC
KMart Corporation, 6.625%,
1/01/07 541,305
------------
$ 11,388,799
------------
INSURED EDUCATION - 2.6%
Aaa AAA $ 500 Michigan Higher Education
Student Loan (AMBAC),
6.875%, 10/01/07 $ 525,110
Aaa AAA 2,000 Northern Michigan
University, Michigan
General Revenue (AMBAC),
6.55%, 12/01/14 2,093,840
Aaa AAA 1,250 Oakland University,
Michigan General Revenue
(MBIA), 5.75%, 5/15/26 1,194,425
Aaa AAA 500 University of Puerto Rico
(MBIA), 5.25%, 6/01/25 456,545
Aaa AAA 500 Western Michigan
University (AMBAC), 6.50%,
7/15/21 517,195
------------
$ 4,787,115
------------
INSURED ELECTRIC UTILITIES - 6.3%
Aaa AAA $1,510 Grand Haven City, Michigan
Electric System (MBIA),
5.25%, 7/01/13 $ 1,380,442
Aaa AAA 300 Michigan Strategic Fund,
Detroit Edison Company
(FGIC), 6.95%, 5/01/11 335,595
Aaa AAA 4,000 Michigan Strategic Fund,
Detroit Edison Company
(FGIC), 6.95%, 9/01/21 4,272,040
Aaa AAA 550 Monroe County, Michigan
PCR Detroit Edison Company
(FGIC) (AMT), 7.65%,
9/01/20 607,508
Aaa AAA 5,000 Monroe County, Michigan
PCR Detroit Edison Company
(MBIA) (AMT), 6.55%,
9/01/24 5,133,100
------------
$ 11,728,685
------------
INSURED GENERAL - 2.1%
Aaa AAA $4,500 Livonia, Michigan School
District U.T.G.O. (FGIC),
5.125%, 5/01/22 $ 3,956,670
------------
INSURED GENERAL OBLIGATION - 12.8%
Aaa AAA $ 250 Byron Center, Michigan
Public Schools U.T.G.O.
(MBIA), 5.875%, 5/01/24 $ 243,050
Aaa AAA 1,000 Chelsea, Michigan School
District U.T.G.O. (FGIC),
5.875%, 5/01/25 (2) 969,170
Aaa AAA 1,500 Dearborn, Michigan School
District U.T.G.O. (MBIA),
5.00%, 5/01/10 1,373,655
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aaa AAA 2,000 Grand Ledge, Michigan
School District U.T.G.O.
(MBIA), 7.875%, 5/01/11 2,344,760
Aaa AAA 1,000 Greenville, Michigan
Public Schools U.T.G.O.
(MBIA) 964,510
Aaa AAA 2,000 Holland City, Michigan
School District U.T.G.O.
(AMBAC), 5.25%, 7/01/13 530,180
Aaa AAA 5,020 Huron Valley, Michigan
School District U.T.G.O.
(FGIC), 5/01/20 1,108,014
Aaa AAA 2,000 Lowell Schools, Michigan
U.T.G.O. (FGIC), 5/01/16 569,260
Aaa AAA 2,000 Napoleon, Michigan School
District U.T.G.O. (FGIC)
5.50%, 5/01/20 1,861,980
Aaa AAA 1,000 Napoleon, Michigan School
District U.T.G.O. (FGIC)
5.50%, 5/01/24 920,280
Aaa AAA 2,610 Okemos, Michigan Public
Schools U.T.G.O. (MBIA),
5/01/16 745,860
Aaa AAA 500 Pellston, Michigan Public
Schools U.T.G.O. (MBIA),
6.625%, 5/01/12 529,325
Aaa AAA 2,000 Portage Lake, Michigan
Water & Sewer G.O.
(AMBAC), 6.20%, 10/01/20 2,032,240
Aaa AAA 4,000 Riverview Community School
District, Michigan
U.T.G.O. (AMBAC), 5.25%,
5/01/21 3,565,600
Aaa AAA 2,000 Riverview Community School
District, Michigan
U.T.G.O. (AMBAC), 5.25%,
5/01/14 1,823,940
Aaa AAA 1,400 Vicksburg Community
Schools, Michigan U.T.G.O.
(MBIA), 5/01/16 392,112
Aaa AAA 1,000 Vicksburg Community
Schools, Michigan U.T.G.O.
(MBIA), 5/01/17 263,410
Aaa AAA 2,500 Warren, Michigan School
District U.T.G.O. (MBIA),
5.50%, 5/01/14 2,370,950
Aaa AAA 1,390 Warren, Michigan School
District U.T.G.O. (MBIA),
5.25%, 5/01/21 1,252,362
------------
$ 23,860,658
------------
INSURED HEALTHCARE - 1.0%
Aaa AAA $2,000 Farmington Hills, Michigan
EDC-Botsford Continuing
Care (MBIA), 5.75%,
2/15/25 $ 1,907,260
------------
INSURED HOSPITAL - 12.4%
Aaa AAA $3,000 Dearborn City, Michigan
EDC Oakwood Obligated
Group (MBIA), 5.25%,
8/15/14 $ 2,711,940
</TABLE>
43
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHIGAN TAX FREE PORTFOLIO (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED HOSPITAL - (CONTINUED)
Aaa AAA 1,000 Dearborn City, Michigan
EDC Oakwood Obligated
Group (MBIA), 5.25%,
8/15/21 882,690
Aaa AAA 3,500 Jackson County, Michigan
HFA W.A. Foote Memorial
(FGIC), 4.75%, 6/01/15 2,992,745
Aaa AAA 5,735 Kalamazoo City, Michigan
HFA Borgess Medical Center
(FGIC), 5.25%, 6/01/17 5,221,316
Aaa AAA 1,750 Kent City, Michigan HFA
Butterworth Hospital
(MBIA), 5.375%, 1/15/19 1,592,762
Aaa AAA 1,015 Michigan HFA Mercy
Memorial Hospital (MBIA),
5.25%, 6/01/13 936,429
Aaa AAA 2,715 Michigan HFA Mercy
Memorial Hospital (MBIA),
5.25%, 6/01/21 2,429,491
Aaa AAA 1,000 Michigan HFA Oakwood
Hospital Obligated Group
(FGIC), 5.625%, 11/01/18 954,410
Aaa AAA 1,500 Michigan HFA Sisters of
Mercy Health Corporation
(MBIA), 5.25%, 8/15/21 1,332,885
Aaa AAA 3,200 Michigan HFA Linked Bulls
& Bears (FSA), 6.10%,
8/15/22 3,221,504
Aaa AAA 1,000 St. Joseph City, Michigan
HFA Mercy Memorial Medical
Center (AMBAC), 5.25%,
1/01/16 910,150
------------
$ 23,186,322
------------
INSURED HOUSING - 1.7%
Aaa AAA $ 500 Michigan HDA Parkway
Meadows Projects (FSA),
6.85%, 10/15/18 $ 518,495
Aaa AAA 2,780 Michigan HDA Mercy
Bellbrook Project (MBIA),
5.375%, 4/01/10 2,617,036
------------
$ 3,135,531
------------
INSURED SPECIAL TAX - 0.2%
Aaa AAA $ 400 Grand Rapids, Michigan
Downtown Development
Authority Tax Increment
(MBIA), 6.875%, 6/01/24 $ 429,840
------------
INSURED TRANSPORTATION - 1.9%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Wayne County, Michigan
Airport (MBIA), 5.25%,
12/01/13 $ 921,380
Aaa AAA 1,000 Wayne County, Michigan
Airport (MBIA), 5.40%,
12/01/16 909,250
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aaa AAA 2,000 Wayne County, Michigan
Airport (MBIA), 5.25%,
12/01/21 1,788,000
------------
$ 3,618,630
------------
INSURED WATER & SEWER - 7.5%
Aaa AAA $ 300 Clinton Township, Michigan
Water and Sewage System
(AMBAC), 4.75%, 7/01/09 $ 272,325
Aaa AAA 400 Clinton Township, Michigan
Water and Sewage System
(AMBAC), 4.75%, 7/01/10 359,544
Aaa AAA 400 Clinton Township, Michigan
Water and Sewage System
(AMBAC), 4.75%, 7/01/11 357,872
Aaa AAA 400 Clinton Township, Michigan
Water and Sewage System
(AMBAC), 4.75%, 7/01/12 356,288
Aaa AAA 4,425 Detroit City, Michigan
Water Supply System
(FGIC), 6.25%, 7/01/12 4,549,343
Aaa AAA 9,680 Detroit City, Michigan
Water Supply System
(FGIC), 4.75%, 7/01/19 8,078,250
------------
$ 13,973,622
------------
MISCELLANEOUS - 3.4%
A1 AA $ 590 Michigan Municipal Bond
Authority Local Government
Loan, 6.90%, 5/01/21 $ 648,404
A1 AA 2,550 Michigan Municipal Bond
Authority Local Government
Loan-Qualified School,
6.50%, 5/01/07 2,768,356
A1 AA 760 Michigan Municipal Bond
Authority Local Government
Loan, 6.50%, 5/01/08 822,685
NR A- 2,000 Michigan Strategic
Environmental Research
Institute, 6.375%, 8/15/12 2,041,880
------------
$ 6,281,325
------------
SOLID WASTE - 4.5%
NR BBB- $4,220 Greater Detroit, Michigan
Resource Recovery
Authority, 9.25%, 12/13/08 $ 4,391,712
NR BBB- 1,000 Greater Detroit, Michigan
Resource Recovery
Authority, 9.25%, 12/13/08 1,040,690
NR BBB- 1,915 Greater Detroit, Michigan
Resource Recovery
Authority, 9.25%, 12/13/08 1,992,921
NR BBB- 1,000 Greater Detroit, Michigan
Resource Recovery
Authority, 9.25%, 12/13/08 1,040,690
------------
$ 8,466,013
------------
</TABLE>
44
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
SPECIAL TAX REVENUE - 5.6%
NR BBB+ $ 250 Battle Creek, Michigan
Downtown Development
Authority Tax Increment,
7.60%, 5/01/16 $ 272,698
NR BBB+ 1,315 Battle Creek, Michigan
Downtown Development
Authority Tax Increment,
7.65%, 5/01/22 1,438,742
NR A 7,650 Detroit City Convention
Facility, Michigan Cobo
Hall Expansion Project,
5.25%, 9/30/12 (3) 6,843,690
NR A 1,825 Michigan Muni Bond
Authority Local Government
Loan Project, 6.75%,
5/01/12 1,944,811
------------
$ 10,499,941
------------
TRANSPORTATION - 1.1%
Baa1 A $2,175 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority,
5.50%, 7/01/19 $ 1,988,842
------------
WATER & SEWER - 0.9%
Aa AA $1,895 Lansing City, Michigan
Water and Electric Utility
System, 4.90%, 7/01/10 $ 1,713,914
------------
TOTAL TAX-EXEMPT
INVESTMENTS (IDENTIFIED
COST, $182,066,681) $186,526,896
============
<FN>
(1) Security has been segregated to cover margin requirements for open financial
futures contracts.
(2) When-issued security.
(3) Security has been segregated to cover when-issued securities.
</TABLE>
The Portfolio invests primarily in debt securities issued by Michigan
municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their
obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or
municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic
developments, at July 31, 1995, 51.8% of the securities in the portfolio of
investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial guaranty assurance
agencies. The aggregate percentage by financial institution ranges from 2.0% to
22.0% of total investments.
See notes to financial statements
45
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minnesota Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
EDUCATION - 3.2%
A NR $ 100 Minnesota Higher Education
Facilities Authority, St.
Olaf College, 6.25%,
4/01/10 $ 100,034
Baa NR 1,000 Minnesota Higher Education
Facilities Authority, St.
Mary's College, 6.15%,
10/01/23 968,720
A NR 1,500 Northfield Minnesota, St.
Olaf College, 6.40%,
10/01/21 1,543,785
-----------
$ 2,612,539
-----------
ESCROWED - 5.4%
Aa AA+ $1,700 State of Minnesota "RIBS",
Variable, 8/01/11 (1) $ 2,016,625
A1 AAA 400 Southern Minnesota
Municipal Power Agency,
7.00%, 1/01/16 413,272
Aaa AAA 1,840 Western Minnesota Municipal
Power Agency, 6.375%,
1/01/16 1,956,380
-----------
$ 4,386,277
-----------
GENERAL OBLIGATIONS - 11.2%
Aa NR $ 500 Brainerd, Independent
School District, 5.50%,
2/01/15 $ 476,455
Aaa AAA 700 City of Minneapolis, 6.25%,
4/01/12 727,902
Aaa AAA 1,000 City of Minneapolis, 5.20%,
3/01/23 943,830
Aa1 AA+ 2,000 State of Minnesota, 5.40%,
8/01/13 1,913,500
Aa1 AA+ 1,000 State of Minnesota, Duluth
Airport, 6.25%, 8/01/14 1,019,330
Aa1 AA+ 1,000 State of Minnesota, Duluth
Airport, 6.25%, 8/01/14 1,019,330
Aa AA 1,250 Regents of the University
of Minnesota, "INFLOS",
Variable, 8/15/03 (1) 1,181,412
A AA- 200 City of Saint Cloud,
"Inverse Floaters",
Variable, 8/01/13 (1) 205,000
Aa NR 1,595 White Bear Lake,
Independent School
District, 6.00%, 2/01/14 1,596,037
-----------
$ 9,082,796
-----------
HEALTHCARE (NON-HOSPITAL) - 5.7%
A A- $1,250 Minneapolis and St. Paul
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority, Group Health
Plan, Inc., 6.75%, 12/01/13 $ 1,298,000
A A- 250 Minneapolis and St. Paul
Housing and Redevelopment
Authority, Group Health
Plan, Inc., 6.90%, 10/15/22 262,768
NR NR 1,000 St. Paul Housing and
Redevelopment Authority,
Highland Park, 8.75%,
11/01/24 997,670
NR BBB+ 2,120 City of Red Wing, Minnesota
Health Care Facilities
Revenue, River Region
Obligated Group, 6.50%,
9/01/22 2,054,322
-----------
$ 4,612,760
-----------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
HOSPITALS - 6.9%
NR AA+ $1,400 City of Rochester,
Minnesota Health Care
Facilities (MHCF) Mayo
Foundation/Medical Center,
6.026%, 11/15/15 $ 1,374,142
NR AA+ 500 City of Rochester, MHCF
Mayo Foundation/Medical
Center, "Inverse Floaters",
Variable 11/15/15 (1) 500,000
NR AA+ 1,700 City of Rochester, MHCF
Mayo Foundation/Medical
Center, 5.75%, 11/15/21 1,668,193
Baa BBB- 1,000 St. Paul Housing and
Redevelopment Authority,
Healtheast Project, 6.625%,
11/01/17 969,920
A A+ 1,000 St. Paul Housing and
Redevelopment Authority,
Childrens Hospital, 7.00%,
12/01/19 1,080,420
-----------
$ 5,592,675
-----------
HOUSING - 13.6%
NR AAA $ 300 City of Coon Rapids, Multi-
Family Housing (MFH) Browns
Meadow Manor, (FHA), (AMT),
6.85%, 7/01/33 $ 300,570
NR AAA 1,395 County of Dakota, Housing
and Redevelopment
Authority, (GNMA), 7.375%,
12/01/29 (2) 1,473,259
Aa NR 1,200 City of Maplewood MFH,
Beaver Creek Apartments,
(FHA), 6.50%, 9/01/24 1,182,960
NR AAA 90 Minneapolis and St. Paul
Housing Finance Board,
(GNMA), (AMT), 7.30%,
8/01/31 94,035
Aa AA 420 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, Single-Family
Mortgage, (SFM), 7.70%,
7/01/14 450,114
Aa AA 380 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, 7.05%, 7/01/22 390,085
Aa AA 1,095 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, (AMT), 5.80%,
7/01/25 1,007,860
Aa AA+ 465 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, 6.95%, 7/01/16 481,094
Aa AA+ 1,000 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, (AMT), 6.75%,
7/01/12 1,019,330
Aa AA+ 1,235 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, (AMT), 6.85%,
1/01/24 1,254,612
Aa AA+ 1,700 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, (AMT), 6.50%,
1/01/26 1,686,502
</TABLE>
46
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
HOUSING - (CONTINUED)
Aa AA+ 710 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, (AMT), 6.75%,
1/01/26 714,352
Aa AA+ 430 Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, SFM, (AMT), 6.15%,
1/01/26 410,121
NR AAA 230 St. Paul, Minnesota Housing
and Redevelopment
Authority, (FNMA), 6.95%,
12/01/31 236,845
NR AAA 360 St. Paul, Minnesota Housing
and Redevelopment
Authority, (FNMA), 6.90%,
12/01/21 370,735
-----------
$11,072,474
-----------
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT/POLLUTION
CONTROL - 8.8%
NR AA- $ 300 City of Minneapolis,
Minnesota Community
Development Agency, 6.40%,
12/01/04 $ 315,618
NR BBB+ 100 City of Minneapolis,
Minnesota Community
Development Agency, 7.35%,
12/01/09 104,342
NR BBB+ 1,605 City of Minneapolis,
Minnesota Community
Development Agency, 6.80%,
12/01/24 1,574,810
Aa3 AA- 3,000 Seaway Port Authority of
Duluth, Cargill, Inc.,
6.80%, 5/01/12 3,203,130
Aa3 NR 2,000 Seaway Port Authority of
Duluth, Cargill, Inc.,
5.75%, 12/01/16 1,961,300
-----------
$ 7,159,200
-----------
INSURED GENERAL OBLIGATION - 3.6%
Aaa AAA $ 500 Cass Lake, Independent
School District, (AMBAC),
6.625%, 2/01/12 $ 537,370
Aaa AAA 1,000 Roseville, Independent
School District, (FGIC),
6.00%, 2/01/23 998,650
Aaa AAA 1,330 St. Francis, Independent
School District No. 15,
(CGIC), 6.35%, 2/01/12 1,391,153
-----------
$ 2,927,173
-----------
INSURED HOSPITAL - 19.7%
Aaa AAA $ 750 Duluth Economic Development
Authority, The Duluth
Clinic, (AMBAC), 6.20%,
11/01/12 $ 771,690
Aaa AAA 100 Minneapolis and St. Paul
Health Care Systems, Health
One Obligated Group,
(MBIA), 7.40%, 8/15/11 108,990
Aaa AAA 5,845 Minneapolis and St. Paul
Health Care Systems,
Healthspan, (AMBAC), 4.75%,
11/15/18 4,895,655
Aaa AAA 250 City of Minneapolis,
Hospital Revenue, Fairview
Hospital and Healthcare,
(MBIA), 6.50%, 1/01/11 262,517
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aaa AAA 750 Plymouth, Health
Facilities, Westhealth
Project (CGIC), 6.25%,
6/01/16 768,293
Aaa AAA 1,000 City of Saint Cloud,
Hospital Facilities, The
Saint Cloud Hospital,
(AMBAC), 6.75%, 7/01/15 1,063,430
Aaa AAA 3,650 City of St. Louis Park,
Health Care Facilities
Health System Minnesota
Obligated Group, (AMBAC),
5.20%, 7/01/23 3,234,119
Aaa AAA 5,150 St. Paul Housing and
Redevelopment Authority,
St. Paul-Ramsey Medical
Center Project, (AMBAC),
5.55%, 5/15/23 4,891,213
-----------
$15,995,907
-----------
INSURED HOUSING - 1.9%
Aaa AAA $1,500 SCA Tax Exempt Trust,
Burnsville, Minnesota
Multi-Family Housing,
(FSA), 7.10%, 1/01/30 $ 1,538,775
-----------
INSURED SPECIAL TAX - 3.5%
Aaa AAA $3,000 St. Paul Housing and
Redevelopment Authority,
Civic Center Project,
(MBIA), 5.45%, 11/01/13 $ 2,840,460
-----------
INSURED UTILITIES - 3.9%
Aaa AAA $ 300 Northern Municipal Power
Agency, (AMBAC), 6.00%,
1/01/19 $ 300,528
Aaa AAA 750 Southern Minnesota
Municipal Power Agency,
(MBIA), 5.00%, 1/01/12 688,477
Aaa AAA 300 Southern Minnesota
Municipal Power Agency,
"Yield Curve Notes",
(MBIA), Variable, 1/01/18
(1) 283,512
Aaa AAA 6,950 Southern Minnesota
Municipal Power Agency,
(MBIA), 0%, 10/01/21 1,494,737
Aaa AAA 510 Western Minnesota Municipal
Power Agency, (MBIA),
5.50%, 1/01/15 489,416
-----------
$ 3,256,670
-----------
LEASE/CERTIFICATE OF
PARTICIPATION - 2.7%
Baa1 NR $ 350 City of Cambridge, Economic
Development Authority,
6.25%, 2/01/14 $ 347,722
</TABLE>
47
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MINNESOTA TAX FREE PORTFOLIO (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
LEASE/CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION -
(CONTINUED)
Aa AA 1,770 Hennepin County, Lease
Revenue Certificates of
Participation, 6.80%,
5/01/17(2) 1,856,199
-----------
$ 2,203,921
-----------
MISCELLANEOUS - 0.9%
A A $ 750 Metropolitan Council,
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Metropolitan Area Sports
Facilities, Hubert H.
Humphrey Metrodome, 6.00%,
10/01/09 $ 757,815
-----------
TRANSPORTATION - 0.6%
Aaa AAA $ 200 Minneapolis and St. Paul,
Minnesota Metropolitan
Airports Commission, (AMT),
6.60%, 1/01/09 $ 211,186
Aaa AAA 300 Minneapolis and St. Paul,
Minnesota Metropolitan
Airports Commission, (AMT),
6.60%, 1/01/10 316,779
-----------
$ 527,965
-----------
UTILITY - 5.1%
Aa3 A- $1,200 Bass Brook, Pollution
Control Revenue, Minnesota
Power & Light Company,
6.00%, 7/01/22 $ 1,173,300
A A 1,500 Northern Municipal Power
Agency, Minnesota Electric,
7.25%, 1/01/16 1,624,965
A1 A+ 1,000 Southern Minnesota
Municipal Power Agency,
5.00%, 1/01/12 902,250
A A 450 Western Minnesota Municipal
Power Agency, 7.00%,
1/01/13 468,599
-----------
$ 4,169,114
-----------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
WATER AND SEWER - 3.3%
Aa3 A $ 450 Anoka County, Minnesota
Solid Waste Disposal
Revenue Natural Rural
Utilities, 6.95%, 12/01/08 $ 483,421
Aa AAA 100 Minnesota Public Facilities
Authority Water Pollution
Control, 7.00%, 3/01/09 107,398
Aa AAA 150 Minnesota Public Facilities
Authority Water Pollution
Control, 6.70%, 3/01/13 160,380
Aa AAA 1,835 Minnesota Public Facilities
Authority Water Pollution
Control, 6.50%, 3/01/14 1,933,393
-----------
$ 2,684,592
-----------
TOTAL TAX-EXEMPT
INVESTMENTS (IDENTIFIED
COST, $78,851,048) $81,421,113
===========
<FN>
(1) The above designated securities have been issued as inverse floater bonds.
(2) Security has been segregated to cover margin requirements for open financial
futures contracts.
</TABLE>
The Portfolio primarily invests in debt securities issued by Minnesota
municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their
obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or
municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic
developments, at July 31, 1995, 34.7% of the securities in the portfolio of
investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial institutions and
financial guaranty assurance agencies. The aggregate percentage by financial
institution ranged from 0.4% to 19.3% of total investments.
See notes to financial statements
48
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Jersey Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
COGENERATION - 5.0%
NR NR $15,750 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Vineland Cogeneration
Limited Partnership,
(AMT), 7.875%, 6/01/19 $ 16,904,475
NR BB+ 3,370 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Trigen-Trenton Project,
(AMT), 6.10%, 12/01/04 3,346,039
------------
$ 20,250,514
------------
EDUCATION - 3.5%
Baa1 BBB $ 2,480 New Jersey Educational
Facilities Authority,
Seton Hall University,
7.00%, 7/01/21 $ 2,618,235
Aa1 AA+ 1,000 New Jersey Educational
Facilities Authority,
Princeton Theological
Seminary, 6.375%, 7/01/22 1,034,580
NR NR 8,800 New Jersey State Higher
Education Assistance
Authority, (AMT), 0%,
7/01/20 3,042,952
NR BBB- 1,760 Puerto Rico Industrial,
Tourist, Educational,
Medical and Environmental
Authority, Polytechnic
University, 5.70%, 8/01/13 1,620,626
NR BBB- 1,310 Puerto Rico Industrial,
Tourist, Educational,
Medical and Environmental
Authority, Polytechnic
University, 5.50%, 8/01/24 1,139,988
NR BBB- 1,000 Puerto Rico Industrial,
Tourist, Educational,
Medical and Environmental
Authority, Polytechnic
University, 6.50%, 8/01/24 999,990
A1 AA 2,500 Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey,
6.85%, 5/01/21 2,658,400
A AA 1,000 University of Medicine and
Dentistry of New Jersey,
7.20%, 12/01/19 1,089,280
------------
$ 14,204,051
------------
ESCROWED - 0.8%
Aaa AAA $ 870 The City of Newark, New
Jersey (AMBAC), 7.375%,
10/01/07 $ 985,440
NR NR 2,000 County of Passaic, New
Jersey, 6.70%, 9/01/13 2,207,360
------------
$ 3,192,800
------------
GENERAL OBLIGATIONS - 13.3%
NR BBB $ 9,745 Government of Guam, 5.40%,
11/15/18 $ 8,414,515
NR A+ 5,000 The Hudson County
Improvement Authority,
6.625%, 8/01/25 5,235,950
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aa1 NR 3,000 Mercer County Improvement
Authority Solid Waste, 0%,
4/01/10 1,299,240
Baa1 A 1,990 Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, 6.45%, 7/01/17 2,083,530
Baa1 A 5,000 Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, 6.50%, 7/01/23 5,234,400
Baa BBB 5,645 The Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico Aqueduct and Sewer
Authority, 7.875%, 7/01/17 6,253,305
Baa1 A 3,250 Puerto Rico Public
Buildings Authority,
Public Education and
Health Facilities, 5.75%,
7/01/15 3,119,675
Baa1 A 5,125 Puerto Rico Public
Buildings Authority,
Public Education and
Health Facilities, 5.50%,
7/01/21 4,695,730
Baa1 A 2,075 Puerto Rico Public
Buildings Authority,
Public Education and
Health Facilities, 5.75%,
7/01/16 1,977,932
NR NR 14,850 Virgin Islands Public
Finance Authority, 7.25%,
10/01/18 15,318,517
------------
$ 53,632,794
------------
HEALTHCARE (NON-HOSPITAL) - 3.0%
NR BBB $ 615 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority
Cadbury Corporation,
7.50%, 7/01/21 $ 593,875
NR BBB 300 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority
Cadbury Corporation,
8.70%, 7/01/07 319,896
NR NR 1,400 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Claremont Health System,
9.10%, 9/01/22 1,465,632
NR NR 2,500 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Victoria Health
Corporation, 7.65%,
1/01/14 2,372,700
NR NR 4,000 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Keswick Pines Project,
8.75%, 1/01/24 3,991,120
NR NR 3,630 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Forsgate Project, 8.625%,
6/01/25 3,410,857
------------
$ 12,154,080
------------
HOSPITALS - 6.6%
Aa AAA $10,790 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Barnert
Hospital, (FHA), 6.80%,
8/01/19 $ 11,298,209
</TABLE>
49
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW JERSEY TAX FREE PORTFOLIO (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
HOSPITALS - (CONTINUED)
A A- 2,300 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Atlantic City
Medical Center, 6.80%,
7/01/11 2,417,300
Baa1 NR 3,100 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Deborah Heart
and Lung Center, 6.30%,
7/01/23 3,047,796
Baa NR 2,000 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Southern Ocean
County Hospital, 6.25%,
7/01/23 1,842,100
A A- 9,650 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Chilton
Memorial Hospital, 5.00%,
7/01/13 8,175,866
------------
$ 26,781,271
------------
HOUSING - 4.4%
Aa AA $ 1,250 New Jersey Building
Authority, 7.20%, 6/15/13 $ 1,357,438
Aa AA- 2,591 New Jersey Building
Authority, Garden State
Savings, 0%, 6/15/10 1,105,813
NR AAA 3,700 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
Presidential Plaza, (FHA),
7.00%, 5/01/30 3,832,793
NR AAA 2,000 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
Presidential Plaza, (FHA),
6.95%, 5/01/13 2,084,940
NR AA+ 1,000 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
Section 8, 7.10%, 11/01/12 1,040,920
NR AA+ 1,975 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
Section 8, 7.10%, 11/01/11 2,055,817
NR AA+ 1,250 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
Rental Housing, (AMT),
7.25%, 11/01/22 1,287,025
NR A+ 1,000 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
Rental Housing, (AMT),
7.10%, 5/01/22 1,029,330
NR A+ 3,715 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
6.60%, 11/01/14 3,773,511
Aaa AAA 300 Puerto Rico Housing
Finance Corporation
Mortgage Revenue (GNMA),
6.85%, 10/15/23 310,209
------------
$ 17,877,796
------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT/POLLUTION
CONTROL - 5.0%
NR NR $ 2,000 Middlesex County Pollution
Control Financing
Authority, Amerada Hess
Corporation, 7.875%,
6/01/22 $ 2,238,020
NR NR 4,000 Middlesex County Pollution
Control Financing
Authority, Amerada Hess
Corporation, 6.875%,
12/01/22 4,168,480
Aa1 NR 3,000 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Garden State Paper
Company, (AMT), 7.125%,
4/01/22 3,124,320
NR NR 2,000 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority, The
Seeing Eye, Inc., 7.30%,
4/01/11 2,123,560
NR BBB 1,160 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
National Association of
Accountants, Inc., 7.65%,
7/01/09 1,241,583
NR AA- 3,300 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority, Oak
Grove Associates, 6.125%,
12/01/06 3,401,937
Baa1 A- 2,135 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
GATX Terminals
Corporation, 7.30%,
9/01/19 2,349,098
Aa3 AA- 1,300 Puerto Rico Industrial,
Medical and Environmental
Pollution Control
Authority, Motorola, Inc.,
6.75%, 1/01/14 1,375,712
------------
$ 20,022,710
------------
INSURED EDUCATION - 0.5%
Aaa AAA $ 2,000 New Jersey State
Educational Facilities
Authority, Seton Hall
University, (BIGI), 6.85%,
7/01/19 $ 2,106,540
------------
INSURED HOSPITALS - 1.4%
Aaa AAA $ 1,310 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Hackensack
Medical Center, (FGIC),
6.625%, 7/01/17 $ 1,372,631
Aaa AAA 2,000 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Hackensack
Medical Center, (FGIC),
6.25%, 7/01/21 2,033,380
Aa AA- 480 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Cathedral
Health Services (MBIA),
7.25%, 2/15/10 522,144
</TABLE>
50
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED HOSPITALS - (CONTINUED)
Aa AA- 1,570 New Jersey Health Care
Facilities Financing
Authority, Cathedral
Health Services, (MBIA)
7.25%, 2/15/21 1,700,059
------------
$ 5,628,214
------------
INSURED HOUSING - 1.3%
Aaa AAA $ 1,410 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
(MBIA), 7.375%, 10/01/17 $ 1,468,007
Aaa AAA 1,760 New Jersey Housing and
Mortgage Finance Agency,
(AMT), (MBIA), 7.70%,
10/01/29 1,847,402
Aaa AAA 1,745 Pennsauken Township
Housing Finance
Corporation, (MBIA),
8.00%, 4/01/11 1,836,665
------------
$ 5,152,074
------------
INSURED LEASE REVENUE - 5.8%
Aaa AAA $ 3,900 County of Atlantic, Public
Facilities Lease
Agreement, (FGIC), 6.00%,
3/01/13 $ 4,011,072
Aaa AAA 1,750 County of Hudson, New
Jersey Correctional
Facility, (MBIA), 6.50%,
12/01/11 1,842,925
Aaa AAA 6,240 County of Hudson, New
Jersey Correctional
Facility, (MBIA), 6.60%,
12/01/21 6,537,648
Aaa AAA 2,500 County of Hudson, New
Jersey Improvement
Authority, Secondary Yield
Curve Notes, (FGIC),
Variable, 12/01/25 (1) 2,507,900
Aaa AAA 1,800 County of Middlesex,
Certificates of
Participation, (MBIA),
6.125%, 2/15/19 1,835,622
Aaa AAA 5,000 New Jersey Builders
(AMBAC), 5%, 6/15/13 4,506,800
Aaa AAA 2,225 University of Medicine and
Dentistry Certificates of
Participation, (MBIA),
6.75%, 12/01/09 2,359,590
------------
$ 23,601,557
------------
INSURED SOLID WASTE - 0.5%
Aaa AAA $ 2,000 The Mercer County
Improvement Authority,
Solid Waste Revenue,
(AMT), (FGIC), 6.70%,
4/01/13 $ 2,118,200
------------
INSURED SPECIAL TAX - 0.8%
Aaa AAA $ 3,375 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Market Transition
Facility, (MBIA), 5.875%,
7/01/11 $ 3,386,914
------------
INSURED TRANSPORTATION - 4.1%
Aaa AAA $ 2,000 The Delaware River and Bay
Authority, (MBIA), 4.75%,
1/01/24 $ 1,660,900
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aaa AAA 5,000 New Jersey Turnpike
Authority "RITES", (MBIA),
Variable, 1/01/16 (1) 5,744,000
Aaa AAA 8,450 New Jersey Turnpike
Authority, (MBIA), 6.50%,
1/01/16 9,162,335
------------
$ 16,567,235
------------
INSURED UTILITIES - 3.9%
Aaa AAA $ 2,750 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority, New
Jersey American Water Co.,
(AMT), (FGIC), 6.875%,
11/01/34 $ 2,912,058
Aaa AAA 13,500 Salem County, Public
Service Electric and Gas,
(MBIA), 5.55%, 11/01/33 12,629,790
------------
$ 15,541,848
------------
INSURED WATER & SEWER - 5.0%
Aaa AAA $ 6,500 Landis New Jersey Sewerage
Authority, Linked "CARS"
(FGIC), 5.65%, 9/19/19 $ 6,248,970
Aaa AAA 2,500 Middlesex County Utilities
Authority, Sewer Revenue,
(MBIA), Variable, 8/15/10
(1) 2,645,425
Aaa AAA 2,000 Township of Monroe, New
Jersey Municipal Utilities
Authority, (MBIA), 5.50%,
2/01/17 1,882,380
Aaa AAA 1,250 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Middlesex Water Company,
(AMBAC), 5.20%, 10/01/22 1,107,550
Aaa AAA 1,650 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Hackensack Water Company,
(MBIA), 5.80%, 3/01/24 1,607,248
Aaa AAA 1,270 Passaic Valley Water
Commissioners, (FGIC),
5.00%, 12/15/22 1,100,214
Aaa AAA 6,130 West New York, New Jersey
Municipal Utilities
Authority, (FGIC), 5.125%,
12/15/17 5,480,772
------------
$ 20,072,559
------------
LEASE/CERTIFICATE OF
PARTICIPATION - 3.7%
Baa1 A- $ 720 County of Atlantic, New
Jersey Public Facilities
Lease Agreement, 8.875%,
1/15/14 $ 929,902
Baa1 A- 785 County of Atlantic, New
Jersey Public Facilities
Lease Agreement, 8.875%,
1/15/15 1,015,043
A1 NR 1,000 Township of Bedminster,
Board of Education,
7.125%, 9/01/10 1,092,370
</TABLE>
51
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW JERSEY TAX FREE PORTFOLIO (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
LEASE/CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION -
(CONTINUED)
Aa AA- 1,000 Mercer County Improvement
Authority, Richard J.
Hughes Justice Complex,
6.05%, 1/01/14 1,000,510
Aa AA- 2,000 Mercer County Improvement
Authority, Richard J.
Hughes Justice Complex,
6.05%, 1/01/15 2,001,020
Aa AA- 1,500 Mercer County Improvement
Authority, Richard J.
Hughes Justice Complex,
6.05%, 1/01/16 1,500,465
Aa AA- 1,500 Mercer County Improvement
Authority, Richard J.
Hughes Justice Complex,
6.05%, 1/01/17 1,500,465
Aa AA- 5,420 New Jersey Building
Authority, 5.00%, 6/15/16 4,785,210
NR A+ 1,000 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Performing Arts Center
Site Acquisition, 6.75%,
6/15/12 1,049,580
------------
$ 14,874,565
------------
MISCELLANEOUS - 4.0%
A1 A+ $ 1,650 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Economic Recovery Fund,
0%, 9/15/09 $ 727,089
A1 A+ 5,500 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Economic Recovery Fund,
0%, 3/15/13 1,911,525
NR NR 7,600 New Jersey Sports and
Exposition Authority,
Monmouth Park, 8.00%,
1/01/25 8,251,167
Aa NR 6,000 New Jersey Sports and
Exposition Authority,
5.20%, 1/01/20 5,318,580
------------
$ 16,208,361
------------
SOLID WASTE - 6.8%
Ba NR $ 3,655 The Atlantic County
Utilities Authority, Solid
Waste Revenue, 7.125%,
3/01/16 $ 3,641,001
Ba BBB+ 6,125 Pollution Control
Financing Authority of
Camden County, (AMT),
7.50%, 12/01/09 6,237,639
Ba NR 5,975 Mercer County Improvement
Authority, Solid Waste
System Revenue, (AMT), 0%,
4/01/14 1,548,003
Ba NR 6,000 Mercer County Improvement
Authority, Solid Waste
System Revenue, (AMT), 0%,
4/01/15 1,445,940
Ba NR 3,000 Mercer County Improvement
Authority, Solid Waste
System Revenue, (AMT), 0%,
4/01/16 672,510
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Ba NR 1,500 Passaic County Utilities
Authority Solid Waste
System Revenue, 7.00%,
11/15/07 1,485,795
NR A- 11,930 Union County, New Jersey
Utilities Authority, Solid
Waste Revenue, (AMT),
7.20%, 6/15/14 12,411,376
------------
$ 27,442,264
------------
SPECIAL TAX - 0.2%
Baa1 BBB+ $ 550 Puerto Rico Infrastructure
Financing Authority,
7.90%, 7/01/07 $ 607,574
------------
TRANSPORTATION - 15.1%
NR BBB $ 1,250 Guam Airport Authority,
(AMT), 6.60%, 10/01/10 $ 1,263,675
NR BBB 1,400 Guam Airport Authority,
6.50%, 10/01/23 1,390,886
NR BBB 2,000 Guam Airport Authority,
(AMT), 6.70%, 10/01/23 1,999,740
A1 AA- 3,705 The Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey,
5.25%, 7/15/14 3,396,706
A1 AA- 9,500 The Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey,
7.35%, 10/01/27 (2) 10,438,315
A1 AA- 2,645 The Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey,
6.75%, 8/01/26 2,792,194
A1 AA- 5,000 The Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey,
(AMT), 6.25%, 1/15/27 4,999,750
A1 AA- 9,000 The Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey,
6.125%, 6/01/94 8,962,560
A1 AA- 5,000 The Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey,
5.375%, 3/01/28 4,561,400
Baa1 BB 5,100 The Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey, Delta
Air Lines Inc., 6.95%,
6/01/08 5,356,428
Baa1 A 2,135 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority,
6.625%, 7/01/12 2,216,963
Baa1 A 3,000 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority,
5.25%, 7/01/21 2,638,110
Baa1 A 4,100 Puerto Rico Highway and
Transportation Authority,
6.625%, 7/01/18 4,243,131
Baa3 BB+ 5,550 Puerto Rico Port
Authority, American
Airlines, (AMT), 6.30%,
6/01/23 5,386,553
</TABLE>
52
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
TRANSPORTATION - (CONTINUED)
NR A+ 1,115 South Jersey Port
Corporation, New Jersey
Marine Terminal, 6.875%,
1/01/20 1,147,224
------------
$ 60,793,635
------------
UTILITY - 2.8%
NR BBB $ 100 Guam Power Authority,
5.25%, 10/01/13 $ 88,727
NR BBB 1,500 Guam Power Authority,
5.25%, 10/01/23 1,267,485
NR BBB 2,000 Guam Power Authority,
6.75%, 10/01/24 2,031,080
A3 BBB+ 625 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Elizabethtown Gas Co.,
(AMT), 6.75%, 10/01/21 632,337
A2 A 1,455 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Natural Gas Facilities,
(AMT), 7.05%, 3/01/16 1,542,387
Baa1 A- 460 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, 7.125%, 7/01/14 498,801
NR NR 5,105 Virgin Islands Water and
Power Authority, Electric
System Revenue, 7.40%,
7/01/11 5,318,032
------------
$ 11,378,849
------------
WATER & SEWER - 2.5%
A1 AA- $ 2,000 Gloucester County
Utilities Authority,
6.50%, 1/01/21 $ 2,062,600
A3 A 3,250 New Jersey Economic
Development Authority,
Elizabethtown Water
Revenue, (AMT), 6.70%,
8/01/21 3,394,853
Aa AA 1,400 New Jersey Wastewater
Treatment Trust, 7.25%,
5/15/08 1,511,230
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aa AA 1,000 New Jersey Wastewater
Treatment Trust, 6.875%,
6/15/09 1,090,310
Aa AA 250 New Jersey Wastewater
Treatment Trust, 7.00%,
6/15/10 273,342
Aa AA 1,000 New Jersey Wastewater
Treatment Trust, 6.00%,
7/01/10 1,022,020
A1 AA 500 The Somerset Raritan
Valley Sewerage Authority,
6.75%, 7/01/10 534,655
------------
$ 9,889,010
------------
TOTAL TAX-EXEMPT
INVESTMENTS (IDENTIFIED
COST, $389,842,758) $403,485,415
============
<FN>
(1) The above designated securities have been issued as inverse floater bonds.
(2) Security has been segregated to cover margin requirements for open financial
futures contracts.
</TABLE>
The Portfolio primarily invests in debt securities issued by New Jersey
municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their
obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or
municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic
developments, at July 31, 1995, 27.9% of the securities in the portfolio of
investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial institutions and
financial guaranty assurance agencies. The aggregate percentage by financial
institution ranged from 0.1% to 14.5% of total investments.
See notes to financial statements
53
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
COGENERATION - 5.3%
NR NR $12,000 Pennsylvania Economic
Development Authority,
Northampton Generating
Project, (AMT), 6.50%,
1/01/13 $ 11,599,320
NR BBB- 9,000 Pennsylvania Economic
Development Authority,
Colver Project, (AMT),
7.125%, 12/01/15 9,437,490
NR BBB- 5,000 Pennsylvania Economic
Development Authority,
Colver Project, (AMT),
7.15%, 12/01/18 5,212,250
------------
$ 26,249,060
------------
EDUCATION - 5.3%
NR BBB $ 4,865 Erie Higher Education
Building Authority,
Mercyhurst College, 5.75%,
3/15/20 $ 4,370,132
Baa1 NR 1,500 Latrobe, Saint Vincent
College, 6.75%, 5/01/24 1,535,460
NR AAA 2,000 Lehigh County, Allentown
College of St. Francis,
6.75%, 12/15/12 2,129,440
Aa AA 3,700 Pennsylvania, University
of Pennsylvania, 6.625%,
1/01/17 3,733,041
NR A- 4,225 Scranton-Lackawanna,
Pennsylvania University,
University of Scranton,
6.40%, 3/01/07 4,368,185
NR AA 9,700 Swarthmore Borough,
Swarthmore College, 6.00%,
9/15/20 9,649,366
------------
$ 25,785,624
------------
ESCROWED - 6.5%
Aaa AAA $ 5,600 Berks County, GO, (FGIC),
Variable, 11/15/20 (1) $ 6,412,000
Aaa A- 1,750 Chester County, HEFA, Bryn
Mar Hospitals, 6.75%,
7/01/14 1,990,468
Aaa AAA 3,195 Derry Township School
District, GO, (AMBAC),
6.20%, 9/01/08 3,430,951
Aaa AAA 2,000 Doylestown Hospital
Authority, Doylestown
Hospital, (AMBAC), 6.90%,
7/01/19 2,219,120
Aaa AAA 1,405 Lycoming County, GO,
(FGIC), 6.40%, 8/15/11 1,540,765
Aaa AAA 945 Lycoming County, GO,
(FGIC), 6.40%, 8/15/11 1,036,315
NR A- 1,000 Pennsylvania, HEFA,
Elizabeth College, 7.25%,
6/15/11 1,150,140
NR A- 6,900 Pennsylvania IDA, Economic
Development, 7.00%,
1/01/11 7,853,649
NR A- 5,155 Philadelphia, Hospital and
Higher Education Facility
Authority, Presbyterian
Medical Center, 6.50%,
12/01/11 5,646,684
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aaa AAA 500 York County Hospital
Authority, York Hospital,
(AMBAC), 7.00%, 7/01/21 565,985
------------
$ 31,846,077
------------
GENERAL OBLIGATIONS - 4.8%
NR A $ 4,725 Chester Upland School
District, 6.375%, 9/01/12 $ 4,828,383
NR A 3,000 Chester Upland School
District, 6.375%, 9/01/21 3,038,070
A1 AA- 465 Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, 6.75%,
1/01/07 498,182
A1 AA- 500 Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, 6.75%,
1/01/08 534,465
A1 AA- 5,435 Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, 6.50%,
11/01/09 5,729,251
A1 AA- 2,000 Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, 6.375%,
9/15/12 2,074,740
NR A 3,000 Dauphin County, 6.90%,
6/02/26 3,166,320
A1 A+ 2,050 Lower Providence Township
Sewer Authority
Guaranteed, 6.75%, 5/01/22 2,142,066
NR A 1,950 McKeesport Area School
District, 5.00%, 4/01/13 1,741,194
------------
$ 23,752,671
------------
HOSPITALS - 22.6%
NR AAA $ 2,470 Allegheny County, IDA,
Presbyterian Medical
Center, 6.75%, 2/01/26 $ 2,548,842
NR A- 4,000 Butler County IDA,
Sherwood Oaks, 5.75%,
6/01/16 3,588,520
NR AA- 12,000 Chester County, HEFA,
(Main Line Health System),
5.50%, 5/15/15 11,139,000
Baa BBB 2,000 Dauphin County Hospital
Authority, Community
General Osteopathic
Hospital, 7.375%, 6/01/16 2,085,880
NR A- 10,250 Delaware County, Riddle
Memorial Hospital, 6.50%,
1/01/22 9,813,863
NR NR 4,755 Hazelton Luzerne County,
Saint Joseph Medical
Center, 8.375%, 7/01/12 4,892,895
Baa1 NR 2,670 Indiana County Hospital
Authority, Indiana
Hospital, 7.125%, 7/01/23 2,689,838
NR BBB+ 3,500 Lebanon County, Good
Samaritan Hospital, 6.00%,
11/15/18 3,148,285
Baa1 A 3,250 Lehigh County, Muhlenberg
Hospital, 6.60%, 7/15/22 3,233,620
NR BBB- 5,405 McKean County Hospital
Authority, Bradford
Hospital, 6.10%, 10/01/20 4,591,115
</TABLE>
54
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
HOSPITALS - (CONTINUED)
NR BBB+ 2,615 Montgomery County,
Pottstown Medical Center,
6.875%, 11/15/20 2,597,558
A1 A+ 500 PA Hospital and Higher
Education Facility
Authority, Allegheny
General Hospital, 7.25%,
9/01/17 536,535
A BBB+ 8,500 PA Hospital and Higher
Education Facility
Authority, Albert Einstein
Medical Center, 7.625%,
4/01/11 9,054,965
Baa1 BBB+ 12,800 PA Hospital and Higher
Education Facility
Authority, Graduate Health
System, 6.625%, 7/01/21 12,228,480
Aa AA 4,500 PA Hospital and Higher
Education Facility
Authority, Children's
Hospital, 5.50%, 2/15/22 4,125,060
Baa1 A- 10,515 PA Hospital and Higher
Education Facility
Authority, Temple
University Hospital,
6.625%, 11/15/23 10,517,418
Aa AA 10,200 PA Hospital and Higher
Education Facility
Authority, Children's
Hospital, 5.00%, 2/15/21 8,745,276
Aa NR 4,750 Pottsville, Hospital
Authority, Daughters of
Charity, 5.00%, 8/15/12 4,238,093
Baa NR 4,115 Somerset County, Hospital
Authority, Somerset
County, Somerset Community
Hospital Project, 6.750%,
3/01/11 3,950,359
A NR 7,000 Washington County,
Hospital Authority,
Monongahela Valley
Hospital, 6.75%, 12/01/08 7,324,310
------------
$111,049,912
------------
HOUSING - 12.3%
NR AAA $ 1,000 Bucks County, Mortgage
Revenue Bonds, Warminster
Heights Project, Section
8-A, 6.80%, 8/01/12 $ 1,029,520
NR NR 2,680 Chester County, IDA,
8.05%, 1/01/24 2,688,120
A1 A+ 3,000 Pennsylvania HFA MF,
7.60%, 7/01/13 3,210,330
Aaa NR 3,000 Philadelphia Redevelopment
Authority, MF, 6.95%,
5/15/24 3,102,450
Aaa NR 2,175 Allegheny County
Residential Finance
Authority, SFMR, (GNMA),
7.15%, 6/01/17 2,212,410
Aa AA 5,700 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
(AMT), 6.75%, 4/01/16 5,816,451
Aa AA 3,730 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
6.90%, 4/01/17 3,834,627
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aa AA 4,000 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
6.85%, 4/01/16 4,099,080
Aa AA 300 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
7.40%, 10/01/09 313,026
Aa AA 770 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
7.20%, 10/01/11 809,124
Aa AA 695 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
7.375%, 10/01/16 720,048
Aa AA 1,000 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
(AMT), Variable, 10/01/23
(1) 1,059,990
Aa AA 5,500 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
(AMT), 6.85%, 4/01/25 5,637,280
Aa AA 8,350 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
(AMT), 7.50%, 10/01/25 8,868,034
Aa AA 10,000 Pennsylvania HFA SFMR,
(AMT), 6.65%, 10/01/21 10,177,400
A1 A 4,235 Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Pittsburgh
Mortgage Revenue Bonds,
(AMT), 7.10%, 4/01/24 4,259,563
A1 A 265 Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Pittsburgh,
7.45%, 4/01/10 278,663
A1 A 1,000 Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Pittsburgh
Mortgage Revenue Bonds,
7.125%, 4/01/15 1,040,790
A1 A 1,055 Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Pittsburgh
Mortgage Revenue Bonds,
(AMT), 7.40%, 4/01/24 1,096,630
------------
$ 60,253,536
------------
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY - 8.7%
A3 A $ 6,950 Butler County IDA,
Witco Corporation Project,
5.85%, 12/01/23 $ 6,573,449
NR BBB 1,005 Clearfield County IDA,
Kmart Corporation,
6.80%, 5/15/07 1,030,095
NR A+ 4,000 Franklin County IDA,
Corning Incorporated,
6.25%, 8/01/05 4,206,280
NR AAA 8,750 Mercer County IDA,
Hillcrest Nursing Center,
0%, 1/15/13 2,475,375
A2 A 12,000 New Morgan IDA, New Morgan
Landfill, (AMT), 6.50%,
4/01/19 12,155,040
Baa2 BBB- 5,000 Pennsylvania, IDA,
Macmilliam Project, (AMT),
7.60%, 12/01/20 5,385,950
Baa1 BBB+ 4,450 Pennsylvania, IDA, Sun
Company Project, (AMT),
7.60%, 12/01/24 4,807,868
A2 A 6,025 Washington County IDA,
West Penn Power, 6.05%,
4/01/14 5,964,630
------------
$ 42,598,687
------------
</TABLE>
55
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PENNSYLVANIA TAX FREE PORTFOLIO (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED AIRPORTS - 1.2%
Aaa AAA $ 6,000 Philadelphia Airport,
(AMBAC), (AMT), 6.00%,
6/15/15 $ 5,903,760
------------
INSURED EDUCATION - 1.1%
Aaa AAA $ 2,500 Pennsylvania Higher
Education Assistance
Agency Student Loan
Revenue Bonds, (AMBAC),
(AMT), 7.15%, 9/01/21 $ 2,639,200
Aaa AAA 1,500 Pennsylvania Higher
Education Assistance
Agency Student Loan
Revenue Bonds, (AMBAC),
(AMT), Variable, 3/01/22
(1) 1,441,965
Aaa AAA 700 Pennsylvania Higher
Education Assistance
Agency Student Loan
Revenue Bonds, (AMBAC),
(AMT), Variable, 9/01/26
(1) 744,744
Aaa AAA 800 Pennsylvania Higher
Education Assistance
Agency Student Loan
Revenue Bonds, (AMBAC),
(AMT), 6.40%, 3/01/22 808,712
------------
$ 5,634,621
------------
INSURED GENERAL OBLIGATION - 3.0%
Aaa AAA $ 1,750 Deer Lakes School
District, (MBIA), 6.45%,
1/15/19 $ 1,792,210
Aaa AAA 2,170 Elizabeth Forward School
District, (MBIA), 0%,
9/01/20 454,701
Aaa AAA 2,170 Elizabeth Forward School
District, (MBIA), 0%,
9/01/21 427,230
Aaa AAA 2,170 Elizabeth Forward School
District, (MBIA), 0%,
9/01/22 401,407
Aaa AAA 2,170 Elizabeth Forward School
District, (MBIA), 0%,
9/01/23 377,168
Aaa AAA 4,345 Elizabeth Forward School
District, (MBIA), 0%,
9/01/24 709,582
Aaa AAA 1,460 Haverford School District,
(FGIC), 6.125%, 6/01/14 1,477,199
Aaa AAA 4,500 Keystone Oaks School
District, (AMBAC),
Variable,
9/01/16 (1) 4,348,170
Aaa AAA 1,430 Mars Area School District,
(MBIA), 0%, 3/01/14 474,245
Aaa AAA 655 Rochester Area School
District, (AMBAC), 0%,
5/01/10 278,703
Aaa AAA 2,795 Venango County, (AMBAC),
6.30%, 12/01/19 2,850,453
Aaa AAA 1,000 West Allegheny County
School District, (AMBAC),
6.60%, 2/01/09 1,034,210
------------
$ 14,625,278
------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED HOSPITAL - 7.1%
Aaa AAA $ 1,170 Allegheny County,
Children's Hospital of
Pittsburgh, (MBIA), 6.75%,
7/01/08 $ 1,234,175
Aaa AAA 3,750 Allegheny County, Magee-
Womens Hospital, (FGIC),
0%, 10/01/15 1,114,425
Aaa AAA 1,400 Armstrong County Saint
Francis Health Care,
(AMBAC), 6.25%, 6/01/13 1,430,296
Aaa AAA 2,500 Armstrong County Saint
Francis Health Care,
(AMBAC), 6.00%, 8/15/08 2,557,425
Aaa AAA 4,400 Bucks County, IDA, Grand
View Hospital, (AMBAC),
5.25%, 7/01/21 3,889,864
Aaa AAA 775 Carbon County, Gnaden
Memorial Hospital,
(AMBAC), 7.00%, 11/15/14 825,243
Aaa AAA 750 Erie County Hospital
Authority, Harlot Medical
Center, (AMBAC), 7.10%,
2/15/10 811,313
Aaa AAA 230 Lehigh County Health East,
Incorporated, (MBIA),
7.00%, 7/01/15 244,801
Aaa AAA 5,000 Lehigh County, St. Luke's
Hospital, (AMBAC), 6.25%,
7/01/22 5,091,850
Aaa AAA 1,000 Montgomery County,
Abington Memorial
Hospital, (AMBAC),
Variable,
6/01/11 (1) 1,111,250
Aaa AAA 5,000 Philadelphia Hospital and
Higher Education,
Pennsylvania Hospital,
(FGIC), Variable, 2/15/12
(1) 4,368,500
Aaa AAA 3,500 Sayre Health Care
Facilities Authority,
Guthrie Healthcare System,
(AMBAC), 6.00%, 3/01/21 3,490,690
Aaa AAA 1,500 Scranton-Lackawanna, Mercy
Health Systems, (MBIA),
6.90%, 1/01/23 1,577,370
Aaa AAA 7,500 Washington County,
Shadyside Hospital,
(AMBAC), 5.75%, 12/15/14 7,277,924
------------
$ 35,025,126
------------
INSURED LEASE - 4.1%
Aaa AAA $ 4,595 Harrisburg Authority,
Dauphin County, Lease
Revenue, (CGIC), 6.25%,
6/01/10 $ 4,904,335
Aaa AAA 3,000 Northumberland County,
Lease Revenue, (MBIA), 0%,
10/15/12 1,109,040
Aaa AAA 5,600 Philadelphia Muni
Authority, Lease Revenue,
(FGIC), 5.625%, 11/15/18 5,317,592
</TABLE>
56
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED LEASE - (CONTINUED)
Aaa AAA 10,000 Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, Lease
Revenue, (AMBAC), 5.00%,
7/01/15 8,751,600
------------
$ 20,082,567
------------
INSURED UTILITIES - 3.9%
Aaa AAA $ 4,000 Beaver County IDA, Ohio
Edison Company, (FGIC),
7.00%, 6/01/21 $ 4,270,880
Aaa AAA 10,000 Beaver County IDA, Ohio
Edison Company, (FGIC),
7.05%, 10/01/20 10,708,500
Aaa AAA 3,800 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority, (FSA),
Variable, 7/01/02 (1) 4,116,578
------------
$ 19,095,958
------------
INSURED WATER & SEWER - 6.2%
Aaa AAA $ 2,750 Allegheny County, Sewer
Revenue, (FGIC), 0%,
12/01/08 $ 1,296,845
Aaa AAA 9,000 Bethlehem Authority,
Northampton and Lehigh
Counties, Water Revenue
Bonds, (MBIA), 4.875%,
11/15/14 7,805,070
Aaa AAA 2,500 City of Philadelphia,
Water and Wastewater,
(FGIC), Variable, 6/15/12
(1) 2,350,000
Aaa AAA 9,000 City of Philadelphia,
Water and Wastewater,
(CGIC), 5.50%, 6/15/15 8,441,280
Aaa AAA 2,460 City of Philadelphia,
Water and Wastewater,
(CGIC), 5.00%, 6/15/16 2,145,440
Aaa AAA 8,920 City of Philadelphia,
Water and Wastewater,
(MBIA), 5.60%, 8/01/18 8,435,555
------------
$ 30,474,190
------------
MISCELLANEOUS - 3.8%
NR AA $ 870 Pennsylvania
Infrastructure Investment
Authority, Pennvest,
6.80%, 9/01/10 $ 922,487
NR A 16,950 Pennsylvania Finance
Authority, Beaver County,
6.60%, 11/01/09 17,744,277
------------
$ 18,666,764
------------
NURSING HOMES - 1.3%
NR NR $ 3,500 Montgomery County IDA,
Geriatric Health Care
Institute, 8.375%, 7/01/23 $ 3,493,910
NR NR 1,460 Westmoreland County IDA,
Highland Health System,
9.25%, 6/01/22 1,517,860
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
NR NR 1,190 Philadelphia Hospital and
Higher Education
Facilities Authority,
Philadelphia Protestant,
8.625%, 7/01/21 1,200,995
------------
$ 6,212,765
------------
SPECIAL TAX REVENUE - 0.1%
Baa1 BBB+ $ 500 Puerto Rico Special Tax
Revenue, 7.50%, 7/01/09 $ 535,485
------------
TRANSPORTATION - 0.3%
Baa1 A $ 1,500 Puerto Rico Commonwealth
Highway, 5.50%, 7/01/13 $ 1,415,115
------------
UTILITIES - 2.2%
Baa3 BB+ $ 500 Beaver County, IDA, Ohio
Edison Company, 7.75%,
9/01/24 $ 524,550
Baa1 BBB+ 3,250 Delaware County, IDA,
Philadelphia Electric
Company, 7.375%, 4/01/21 3,462,745
Baa1 BBB+ 4,070 Montgomery County, IDA,
Philadelphia Electric
Company, (AMT), 7.60%,
4/01/21 4,337,358
Baa1 A- 3,370 Puerto Rico Electric Power
Authority Power Revenue,
0%, 7/01/17 863,866
NR NR 1,500 Virgin Islands Water and
Power Authority, 7.40%,
7/01/11 1,562,595
------------
$ 10,751,114
------------
WATER & SEWER REVENUE - 0.2%
Baa1 A $ 1,000 Puerto Rico Aqueduct and
Sewer Authority, 7.90%,
7/01/07 $ 1,109,020
------------
TOTAL TAX-EXEMPT
INVESTMENTS (IDENTIFIED
COST, $477,086,127) $491,067,330
============
<FN>
(1) The above designated securities have been issued as inverse floater bonds.
</TABLE>
The Portfolio primarily invests in debt securities issued by Pennsylvania
municipalities. The ability of the issuers of debt securities to meet their
obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or
municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic
developments, at July 31, 1995, 28.3% of the securities in the portfolio of
investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial institutions and
financial guaranty assurance agencies. The aggregate percentage by financial
institution ranged from 0.4% to 11.5% of total investments.
See notes to financial statements
57
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Texas Tax Free Portfolio
Portfolio of Investments - July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS - 100%
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
EDUCATION - 3.7%
A NR $ 700 Brazos Higher Education
Authority, Texas Student
Loan Subordinate, 6.50%,
6/01/04 $ 727,524
Aa1 AA 250 University of Texas, 6.75%,
8/15/13 (1) 267,055
-----------
$ 994,579
-----------
ELECTRIC UTILITIES - 1.6%
NR BBB $ 500 Guam Power Authority,
5.25%, 10/01/23 $ 422,495
-----------
ESCROWED - 3.6%
Baa1 BBB $ 200 Bexar County, Texas, St.
Luke's Lutheran Hospital,
7.00%, 5/01/21 $ 227,466
Aaa NR 1,000 Central Texas Housing
Corporation Single Family,
0%, 9/01/16 270,510
Aaa AAA 85 Harris County Texas Toll
Road Unlimited Tax and
Subordinate Lien (AMBAC),
6.625%, 8/15/17 90,796
Aaa AAA 200 Montgomery County, Texas
Hospital District (FSA),
6.625%, 4/01/17 224,720
Aaa AAA 150 Texas National Research Lab
Super Collider, 6.95%,
12/01/12 167,802
-----------
$ 981,294
-----------
GENERAL OBLIGATIONS - 16.8%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Bastrop, Texas Independent
School District U.T.G.O.
(PSF), 0.00%, 2/15/13 $ 349,880
Aaa NR 500 Crandall, Texas Independent
School District U.T.G.O.
(PSF), 6.00%, 2/15/24 495,935
Aaa AAA 1,000 Cypress-Fairbanks, Texas
Independent School District
U.T.G.O. (PSF), 5.25%,
2/15/19 904,900
Aaa AAA 550 Grand Prairie, Texas
Independent School District
U.T.G.O. (PSF), 0%, 2/15/12 202,680
Aaa AA+ 350 Irving, Texas L.T.G.O.
4.875%, 9/15/14 (1) 309,544
Aaa AAA 1,000 Round Rock, Texas
Independent School District
U.T.G.O. (PSF), 5.50%,
8/01/15 948,900
Aa AA 250 Texas Veterans' Housing
Assistance U.T.G.O. (AMT),
6.45%, 6/01/23 247,420
Aa AA 690 Texas Veterans' Housing
Assistance U.T.G.O. (AMT),
6.70%, 12/01/24 697,321
Aa AA 395 Texas Veterans' Housing
Assistance U.T.G.O. (AMT),
6.80%, 12/01/23 401,980
-----------
$ 4,558,560
-----------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
HEALTH CARE - 1.9%
NR NR $ 500 Bell County, Texas HFC
Elder Care Facilities,
9.00%, 11/01/24 $ 523,725
-----------
HOSPITALS - 11.1%
NR BBB $ 500 Denison, Texas, Texoma
Medical Center, 7.10%,
8/15/24 $ 502,255
A A- 100 Ector County, Texas
Hospital District, 7.30%,
4/15/12 105,170
A A- 100 Harris County, Texas
Hospital District, 7.125%,
6/01/15 104,750
A A- 1,100 Harris County, Texas
Hospital District, Memorial
Hospital System, 6.625%,
6/01/24 1,114,696
Aa AA 250 McAllen Health Facilities,
Texas, Sisters of Mercy,
5.00%, 6/01/15 220,160
A1 NR 1,000 Tarrant County, Texas,
Methodist Health System,
6.00%, 9/01/24 971,830
-----------
$ 3,018,861
-----------
HOUSING - 4.2%
Aa NR $ 400 Kaufman, Texas HDC
Multifamily (FHA) Section
8, 6.00%, 2/01/22 $ 377,764
NR A 750 Travis County, Texas HFC
Multifamily Travis Station
Apartments, 6.75%, 4/01/19 762,435
-----------
$ 1,140,199
-----------
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE/
POLLUTION CONTROL REVENUE - 7.0%
Baa1 BBB $ 450 Gulf Coast, Texas Waste
Disposal Authority,
Champion International
(AMT), 7.25%, 4/01/17 $ 481,401
A2 A+ 1,000 Port Corpus Christi, Texas,
Hoechst Celanese
Corporation, 6.875%,
4/01/17 1,048,690
Baa2 BBB 400 West Side Calhoun County
Navigation District, Texas,
Union Carbide (AMT), 6.40%,
5/01/23 380,572
-----------
$ 1,910,663
-----------
INSURED EDUCATION - 0.4%
Aaa AAA $ 100 Southwest, Texas, Southern
Methodist University
(FGIC), 6.375%, 10/01/13 $ 104,393
-----------
INSURED ELECTRIC UTILITIES - 14.5%
Aaa AAA $1,000 Austin, Texas Utility
System (FGIC), 6.25%,
5/15/16 $ 1,020,160
Aaa AAA 250 Brazos River Authority,
Texas, Houston Lighting and
Power Company (FGIC),
7.20%, 12/01/18 267,497
</TABLE>
58
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAX-EXEMPT INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED ELECTRIC UTILITIES -
(CONTINUED)
Aaa AAA 75 Brazos River Authority,
Texas, Houston Light and
Power (AMBAC), 6.70%,
3/01/17 78,424
Aaa AAA 1,050 Corpus Christi, Texas
Utility System (MBIA),
5.20%, 7/15/13 960,561
Aaa AAA 500 Lower Colorado River
Authority Junior Lien,
Texas (FGIC), 0%, 1/01/12 183,855
Aaa AAA 605 Montgomery County, Texas
MUD #47 Water & Sewer
(AMBAC), 6.125%, 10/01/20 607,432
Aaa AAA 100 Sabine River Authority,
Texas, Utilities Electric
Company (FGIC), 6.55%,
10/01/22 103,182
Aaa AAA 1,395 Texas Municipal Power
Agency (MBIA), 0%, 9/01/13 463,405
Aaa AAA 1,000 Texas Municipal Power
Agency (MBIA), 0%, 9/01/17 254,790
-----------
$ 3,939,306
-----------
INSURED GENERAL OBLIGATION - 1.9%
Aaa AAA $ 100 Brownsville, Texas
Navigation District
(AMBAC), 6.25%, 3/01/14 $ 102,245
Aaa AAA 500 Ector County, Texas G.O.
(AMBAC), 4.25%, 2/15/10 426,335
-----------
$ 528,580
-----------
INSURED HOSPITAL - 6.6%
Aaa AAA $ 250 Coastal Bend, Texas HFC
Incarnate Word Health
Services (AMBAC), 6.30%,
1/01/17 $ 254,058
Aaa AAA 500 Harris County, Texas HFC
Hermann Hospital (MBIA),
6.375%, 10/01/24 (1) 507,320
Aaa AAA 1,000 Tyler County, Texas HFC
Mother Frances Hospital
(FGIC), 6.50%, 7/01/22 1,029,190
-----------
$ 1,790,568
-----------
INSURED LEASE/COP - 1.7%
Aaa AAA $ 500 East Texas Jails, Angelina
County Project (MBIA),
5.25%, 5/01/14 $ 459,665
-----------
INSURED TRANSPORTATION - 12.0%
Aaa AAA $ 500 Dallas-Fort Worth
International Airport,
Texas (MBIA), 6.00%,
11/01/12 $ 504,175
Aaa AAA 500 Dallas-Fort Worth
International Airport,
Texas (FGIC), 5.625%,
11/01/15 475,890
Aaa AAA 500 Harris County, Texas Toll
Road Senior Lien (AMBAC),
5.30%, 8/15/13 465,385
Aaa AAA 2,000 Harris County, Texas Toll
Road Subordinate Lien
(FGIC), 5.375%, 8/15/20 1,819,820
-----------
$ 3,265,270
-----------
<CAPTION>
RATINGS
(UNAUDITED)
- ----------------- PRINCIPAL
AMOUNT
STANDARD (000
MOODY'S & POOR'S OMITTED) SECURITY VALUE
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INSURED WATER & SEWER - 1.7%
Aaa AAA $ 520 Tarrant County, Texas Water
and Improvement District
Number One (AMBAC), 4.75%,
3/01/12 $ 450,819
-----------
LEASE/COP - 0.9%
NR BBB- $ 250 Rio Grande, Texas
Independent School District
Lease, 6.75%, 7/15/10 $ 241,558
-----------
MISCELLANEOUS - 5.9%
Baa2 BB+ $ 505 Alliance Airport Authority,
Texas, American Airlines,
7.50%, 12/01/29 $ 524,180
Aaa AAA 1,000 Austin, Texas Hotel
Occupancy Tax Revenue,
5.125% (AMBAC), 11/15/19 882,970
NR NR 250 Retama Development, Texas,
Retama Racetrack, 8.75%,
12/15/18 200,000
-----------
$ 1,607,150
-----------
TRANSPORTATION - 3.7%
Ba1 BB $ 235 Dallas-Fort Worth Texas
Airport, Delta Airlines
(AMT), 7.125%, 11/01/26 $ 239,872
Baa2 BB+ 225 Dallas-Fort Worth Texas
Airport, Delta Airlines
(AMT), 7.50%, 11/01/25 233,986
NR BBB 255 Guam Airport Authority
(AMT), 6.70%, 10/01/23 254,967
Aa AA 25 Harris County, Texas Toll
Road, Subordinate Lien,
6.75%, 8/01/14 26,726
Baa3 BB+ 250 Puerto Rico Ports
Authority, American
Airlines (AMT), 6.30%,
6/01/23 242,637
-----------
$ 998,188
-----------
WATER & SEWER REVENUE - 0.8%
Aa AA $ 250 Dallas, Texas Water and
Sewer, 5.00%, 4/01/09 $ 236,018
-----------
TOTAL TAX-EXEMPT
INVESTMENTS (IDENTIFIED
COST, $26,750,393) $27,171,891
===========
<FN>
(1) Security has been segregated to cover margin requirements for open financial
futures contracts.
</TABLE>
The Portfolio invests primarily in debt securities issued by Texas
municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their
obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or
municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic
developments, at July 31, 1995, 55.3% of the securities in the portfolio of
investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial guaranty assurance
agencies. The aggregate percentage by financial institution ranges from 0.8% to
18.4% of total investments.
See notes to financial statements
59
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tax Free Portfolios
Financial Statements
<TABLE>
STATEMENTS OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
ASSETS:
Investments --
Identified cost $140,218,111 $44,277,269 $192,808,845 $182,066,681
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) 3,828,622 1,159,426 (1,554,336) 4,460,215
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Total investments, at value (Note 1A) $144,046,733 $45,436,695 $191,254,509 $186,526,896
Cash 426 687,824 1,592,566 2,048,393
Receivable for investments sold -- 35,463 -- 800,000
Interest receivable 1,411,599 596,740 2,509,768 2,949,373
Deferred organization expenses (Note 1D) 4,476 1,464 6,823 6,501
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Total assets $145,463,234 $46,758,186 $195,363,666 $192,331,163
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
LIABILITIES:
Payable for when issued securities (Note 1F) $ -- $ 658,200 $ -- $ 964,896
Payable for daily variation margin on open financial
futures contracts (Note 1E) 33,469 20,719 77,031 99,875
Demand note payable (Note 5) 903,000 -- -- --
Payable to affiliates --
Trustees' fees 669 135 919 889
Custodian fees 2,924 639 3,823 --
Accrued expenses 2,157 1,327 6,104 2,522
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Total liabilities $ 942,219 $ 681,020 $ 87,877 $ 1,068,182
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Net Assets applicable to investors' interest in
Portfolio $144,521,015 $46,077,166 $195,275,789 $191,262,981
============ =========== ============ ============
SOURCES OF NET ASSETS:
Net proceeds from capital contributions and
withdrawals $140,643,966 $44,887,762 $196,718,666 $186,667,067
Unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments
and financial futures contracts (computed on the
basis ofidentified cost) 3,877,049 1,189,404 (1,442,877) 4,595,914
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Total $144,521,015 $46,077,166 $195,275,789 $191,262,981
============ =========== ============ ============
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
60
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENTS OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
ASSETS:
Investments --
Identified cost $78,851,048 $389,842,758 $477,086,127 $26,750,393
Unrealized appreciation 2,570,065 13,642,657 13,981,203 421,498
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total investments, at value (Note 1A) $81,421,113 $403,485,415 $491,067,330 $27,171,891
Cash 400,411 1,075,446 4,181,885 1,058,371
Receivable for investments sold -- 3,861,470 30,000 --
Interest receivable 1,168,552 5,337,412 6,962,611 472,632
Receivable from the Investment Adviser (Note 2) -- -- -- 18,606
Deferred organization expenses (Note 1D) 2,508 11,270 13,558 1,415
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total assets $82,992,584 $413,771,013 $502,255,384 $28,722,915
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
LIABILITIES:
Payable for investments purchased $ -- $ 2,654,715 $ -- $ 479,270
Payable for daily variation margin on open financial
futures contracts (Note 1E) 21,250 66,406 -- 14,875
Payable to affiliates --
Trustees' fees 540 1,406 1,713 137
Custodian fees 1,572 5,883 -- 211
Accrued expenses 1,526 4,181 3,367 1,401
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total liabilities $ 24,888 $ 2,732,591 $ 5,080 $ 495,894
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net Assets applicable to investors' interest in
Portfolio $82,967,696 $411,038,422 $502,250,304 $28,227,021
=========== ============ ============ ===========
SOURCES OF NET ASSETS:
Net proceeds from capital contributions and
withdrawals $80,383,134 $397,350,461 $488,269,101 $27,771,750
Unrealized appreciation of investments and financial
futures contracts (computed on the basis of
identified cost) 2,584,562 13,687,961 13,981,203 455,271
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total $82,967,696 $411,038,422 $502,250,304 $28,227,021
=========== ============ ============ ===========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
61
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
<TABLE>
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INVESTMENT INCOME (NOTE 1B):
Interest income $ 9,380,468 $ 2,916,273 $12,024,017 $12,313,929
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Expenses --
Investment adviser fee (Note 2) $ 629,148 $ 128,496 $ 835,605 $ 856,258
Compensation of Trustees not members of the Investment
Adviser's organization (Note 2) 9,186 1,335 17,185 11,255
Custodian fees (Note 2) 65,302 16,604 48,135 1,944
Interest expense (Note 5) 24,478 7,980 55,056 19,364
Legal and accounting services 23,018 20,942 27,771 26,172
Bond pricing 11,371 7,911 15,577 14,364
Amortization of organization expenses (Note 1D) 1,793 637 2,620 2,493
Printing and postage 200 -- 552 --
Registration costs 125 125 125 125
Miscellaneous 4,266 1,133 15,780 4,161
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Total expenses $ 768,887 $ 185,163 $ 1,018,406 $ 936,136
Deduct reduction of investment adviser fee (Note 2) -- 69,064 -- --
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Net expenses $ 768,887 $ 116,099 $ 1,018,406 $ 936,136
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Net investment income $ 8,611,581 $ 2,800,174 $11,005,611 $11,377,793
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENTS:
Net realized loss --
Investment transactions (identified cost basis) $(4,877,347) $(1,800,477) $(2,556,284) $(3,817,102)
Financial futures contracts (995,149) (721,504) (2,778,750) (2,415,234)
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Net realized loss on investments $(5,872,496) $(2,521,981) $(5,335,034) $(6,232,336)
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Change in unrealized appreciation --
Investments $ 7,691,430 $ 2,725,487 $ 3,995,907 $ 6,667,070
Financial futures contracts 166,028 98,064 537,717 280,007
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Net unrealized appreciation of investments $ 7,857,458 $ 2,823,551 $ 4,533,624 $ 6,947,077
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on
investments $ 1,984,962 $ 301,570 $ (801,410) $ 714,741
----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
Net increase in net assets from operations $10,596,543 $ 3,101,744 $10,204,201 $12,092,534
=========== =========== =========== ===========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
62
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INVESTMENT INCOME (NOTE 1B):
Interest income $ 5,259,766 $ 26,778,322 $ 33,140,571 $ 1,711,252
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Expenses --
Investment adviser fee (Note 2) $ 310,489 $ 1,944,340 $ 2,416,419 $ 56,319
Compensation of Trustees not members of the
Investment Adviser's organization (Note 2) 5,240 14,740 20,013 1,753
Custodian fees (Note 2) 20,399 91,170 -- 7,834
Interest expense (Note 5) 18,478 38,870 11,820 3,559
Legal and accounting services 23,039 35,317 38,577 16,838
Bond pricing 11,391 18,054 15,974 8,533
Amortization of organization expenses (Note 1D) 1,018 4,464 5,278 605
Registration costs -- 125 125 125
Miscellaneous 2,379 8,434 8,815 208
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total expenses $ 392,433 $ 2,155,514 $ 2,517,021 $ 95,774
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Deduct --
Reduction of investment adviser fee (Note 2) $ -- $ -- $ -- $ 56,319
Allocation of expenses to the Investment Adviser
(Note 2) -- -- -- 18,606
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total $ -- $ -- $ -- $ 74,925
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net expenses $ 392,433 $ 2,155,514 $ 2,517,021 $ 20,849
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net investment income $ 4,867,333 $ 24,622,808 $ 30,623,550 $ 1,690,403
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN (LOSS) ON INVESTMENTS:
Net realized loss --
Investment transactions (identified cost basis) $(3,665,826) $(13,015,045) $(13,832,451) $ (610,466)
Financial futures contracts (1,549,418) (4,759,465) (6,462,533) (393,285)
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net realized loss on investments $(5,215,244) $(17,774,510) $(20,294,984) $(1,003,751)
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Change in unrealized appreciation --
Investments $ 4,573,005 $ 15,570,319 $ 16,678,284 $ 1,169,634
Financial futures contracts 195,669 1,061,635 2,323,941 50,424
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net unrealized appreciation of investments $ 4,768,674 $ 16,631,954 $ 19,002,225 $ 1,220,058
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on
investments $ (446,570) $ (1,142,556) $ (1,292,759) $ 216,307
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 4,420,763 $ 23,480,252 $ 29,330,791 $ 1,906,710
=========== ============ ============ ===========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
63
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
<TABLE>
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1995
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 8,611,581 $ 2,800,174 $ 11,005,611 $ 11,377,793
Net realized loss on investment transactions (5,872,496) (2,521,981) (5,335,034) (6,232,336)
Change in unrealized appreciation of investments 7,857,458 2,823,551 4,533,624 6,947,077
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 10,596,543 $ 3,101,744 $ 10,204,201 $ 12,092,534
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Capital transactions --
Contributions $ 21,272,707 $ 10,355,365 $ 25,911,862 $ 14,779,804
Withdrawals (41,416,595) (11,778,902) (32,878,239) (39,641,020)
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Decrease in net assets resulting from capital
transactions $(20,143,888) $ (1,423,537) $ (6,966,377) $(24,861,216)
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Total increase (decrease) in net assets $ (9,547,345) $ 1,678,207 $ 3,237,824 $(12,768,682)
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of year 154,068,360 44,398,959 192,037,965 204,031,663
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
At end of year $144,521,015 $ 46,077,166 $195,275,789 $191,262,981
============ ============ ============ ============
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
------------ ------------ ------------- -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 4,867,333 $ 24,622,808 $ 30,623,550 $ 1,690,403
Net realized loss on investment transactions (5,215,244) (17,774,510) (20,294,984) (1,003,751)
Change in unrealized appreciation of investments 4,768,674 16,631,954 19,002,225 1,220,058
------------ ------------ ------------ -----------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 4,420,763 $ 23,480,252 $ 29,330,791 $ 1,906,710
------------ ------------ ------------ -----------
Capital transactions --
Contributions $ 11,350,380 $ 43,487,001 $ 38,709,755 $ 4,736,724
Withdrawals (16,808,817) (79,782,847) (102,576,381) (6,005,420)
------------ ------------ ------------ -----------
Decrease in net assets resulting from capital
transactions $ (5,458,437) $(36,295,846) $(63,866,626) $(1,268,696)
------------ ------------ ------------ -----------
Total increase (decrease) in net assets $ (1,037,674) $(12,815,594) $(34,535,835) $ 638,014
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of year 84,005,370 423,854,016 536,786,139 27,589,007
------------ ------------ ------------ -----------
At end of year $ 82,967,696 $411,038,422 $502,250,304 $28,227,021
============ ============ ============ ===========
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
64
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended July 31, 1994*
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 6,694,909 $ 1,681,554 $ 8,098,918 $ 9,191,618
Net realized gain (loss) on investment
transactions (79,923) (238,197) 610,531 459,500
Change in unrealized depreciation of investments (11,906,679) (2,832,041) (15,885,963) (15,894,224)
------------ ----------- ----------- ------------
Net decrease in net assets from operations $ (5,291,693) $(1,388,684) $ (7,176,514) $ (6,243,106)
------------ ----------- ----------- ------------
Capital transactions --
Contributions $ 49,588,326 $25,061,524 $ 55,286,988 $ 43,549,085
Withdrawals (23,767,597) (3,620,273) (15,920,869) (20,939,507)
------------ ----------- ----------- ------------
Increase in net assets resulting from capital
transactions $ 25,820,729 $21,441,251 $ 39,366,119 $ 22,609,578
------------ ----------- ----------- ------------
Total increase in net assets $ 20,529,036 $20,052,567 $ 32,189,605 $ 16,366,472
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of period 133,539,324 24,346,392 159,848,360 187,665,191
------------ ----------- ----------- ------------
At end of period $154,068,360 $44,398,959 $192,037,965 $204,031,663
============ =========== ============ ============
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 3,534,268 $ 19,598,942 $ 25,052,308 $ 1,024,502
Net realized gain (loss) on investment transactions 361,104 1,931,832 (1,606,336) (193,762)
Change in unrealized depreciation of investments (6,315,849) (34,629,145) (41,094,537) (1,491,855)
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net decrease in net assets from operations $(2,420,477) $(13,098,371) $(17,648,565) $ (661,115)
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Capital transactions --
Contributions $28,250,170 $ 95,610,275 $113,666,177 $14,312,043
Withdrawals (8,843,182) (52,334,675) (56,232,111) (2,091,287)
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Increase in net assets resulting from capital
transactions $19,406,988 $ 43,275,600 $ 57,434,066 $12,220,756
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total increase in net assets $16,986,511 $ 30,177,229 $39,785,501 $11,559,641
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of period 67,018,859 393,676,787 497,000,638 16,029,366
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
At end of period $84,005,370 $423,854,016 $536,786,139 $27,589,007
=========== ============ ============ ===========
<FN>
* For the ten months ended July 31, 1994 (Note 7).
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
65
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
<TABLE>
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Ended September 30, 1993*
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 3,814,722 $ 529,081 $ 4,491,010 $ 5,803,151
Net realized gain (loss) on investment
transactions 2,843,057 (42,421) (369,709) (383,574)
Change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation)
of investments 5,331,763 1,030,366 8,422,527 9,602,839
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 11,989,542 $ 1,517,026 $ 12,543,828 $ 15,022,416
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Capital transactions --
Contributions $148,348,087 $23,748,943 $187,818,789 $184,212,796
Withdrawals (26,898,325) (1,019,597) (40,614,277) (11,670,041)
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Increase in net assets resulting from capital
transactions $121,449,762 $22,729,346 $147,204,512 $172,542,755
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
Total increase in net assets $133,439,304 $24,246,372 $159,748,340 $187,565,171
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of period 100,020 100,020 100,020 100,020
------------ ----------- ------------ ------------
At end of period $133,539,324 $24,346,392 $159,848,360 $187,665,191
============ =========== ============ ============
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS:
From operations --
Net investment income $ 1,988,776 $ 12,599,045 $ 16,036,467 $ 333,755
Net realized gain (loss) on investment transactions (249,985) 108,306 2,426,891 (68,370)
Change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation)
of investments 3,295,330 20,473,018 21,996,791 606,518
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Net increase in net assets from operations $ 5,034,121 $ 33,180,369 $ 40,460,149 $ 871,903
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Capital transactions --
Contributions $75,312,856 $409,889,770 $536,041,409 $19,000,571
Withdrawals (13,428,138) (49,493,372) (79,600,940) (3,943,128)
----------- ------------ ----------- -----------
Increase in net assets resulting from capital
transactions $61,884,718 $360,396,398 $456,440,469 $15,057,443
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
Total increase in net assets $66,918,839 $393,576,767 $496,900,618 $15,929,346
NET ASSETS:
At beginning of period 100,020 100,020 100,020 100,020
----------- ------------ ------------ -----------
At end of period $67,018,859 $393,676,787 $497,000,638 $16,029,366
=========== ============ ============ ===========
<FN>
* For the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to September 30, 1993.
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
66
<PAGE>
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA PORTFOLIO COLORADO PORTFOLIO
------------------------------- -------------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
------------------------------- -------------------------------
JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30, JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30,
1995 1994* 1993** 1995 1994* 1993**
-------- -------- --------- -------- -------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
RATIOS (AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE
DAILY NET ASSETS)++:
Net expenses 0.52% 0.46%+ 0.42% + 0.25% 0.02% + 0.06%+
Net investment income 5.81% 5.43%+ 5.46% + 6.05% 5.73% + 5.60%+
PORTFOLIO TURNOVER 22% 23% 107% 52% 23% 10%
NET ASSETS, end of period (000 omitted) $144,521 $154,068 $133,539 $46,077 $44,399 $24,346
<FN>
++The operating expenses of the Portfolios may reflect a reduction of the
investment adviser fee and/or allocation of expenses to the Investment
Adviser. Had such actions not been taken, the ratios would have been as
follows:
RATIOS (AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE DAILY NET ASSETS):
Expenses 0.40% 0.35%+ 0.35%+
Net investment income 5.90% 5.40%+ 5.31%+
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
CONNECTICUT PORTFOLIO MICHIGAN PORTFOLIO
------------------------------- -------------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
------------------------------- -------------------------------
JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30, JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30,
1995 1994* 1993** 1995 1994* 1993**
-------- -------- --------- -------- -------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
RATIOS (AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE
DAILY NET ASSETS):
Net expenses 0.53% 0.47%+ 0.46% + 0.48% 0.47%+ 0.44% +
Net investment income 5.77% 5.40%+ 5.45% + 5.85% 5.48%+ 5.46% +
PORTFOLIO TURNOVER 29% 10% 10% 54% 45% 20%
NET ASSETS, end of period (000 omitted) $195,276 $192,038 $159,848 $191,263 $204,032 $187,665
<FN>
+ Annualized.
* For the ten months ended July 31, 1994 (Note 7).
** For the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to September 30, 1993.
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
67
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
<TABLE>
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA PORTFOLIO NEW JERSEY PORTFOLIO
------------------------------- -------------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
------------------------------- -------------------------------
JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30, JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30,
1995 1994* 1993** 1995 1994* 1993**
-------- -------- --------- -------- -------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
RATIOS (AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE
DAILY NET ASSETS):
Net expenses 0.47% 0.45% + 0.40%+ 0.52% 0.50%+ 0.50% +
Net investment income 5.83% 5.50% + 5.58%+ 5.96% 5.62%+ 5.67% +
PORTFOLIO TURNOVER 76% 20% 10% 54% 25% 12%
NET ASSETS, end of period (000 omitted) $82,968 $84,005 $67,019 $411,038 $423,854 $393,677
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
PENNSYLVANIA PORTFOLIO TEXAS PORTFOLIO
------------------------------- -------------------------------
YEAR ENDED YEAR ENDED
------------------------------- -------------------------------
JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30, JULY 31, JULY 31, SEPT. 30,
1995 1994* 1993** 1995 1994* 1993**
-------- -------- --------- -------- -------- ---------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C> <C>
RATIOS (AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE
DAILY NET ASSETS)++ :
Net expenses 0.49% 0.48%+ 0.50% + 0.08% 0.00% + 0.03%+
Net investment income 6.02% 5.66%+ 5.71% + 6.20% 5.69% + 5.82%+
PORTFOLIO TURNOVER 44% 21% 17% 49% 27% 8%
NET ASSETS, end of period (000 omitted) $502,250 $536,786 $497,001 $28,227 $27,589 $16,029
<FN>
++The operating expenses of the Portfolios may reflect a reduction of the
investment adviser fee and/or allocation of expenses to the Investment
Adviser. Had such actions not been taken, the ratios would have been as
follows:
RATIOS (AS A PERCENTAGE OF AVERAGE DAILY NET ASSETS):
Expenses 0.35% 0.37%+ 0.42%+
Net investment income 5.93% 5.32%+ 5.43%+
+ Annualized.
* For the ten months ended July 31, 1994 (Note 7).
** For the period from the start of business, February 1, 1993, to September 30, 1993.
</TABLE>
See notes to financial statements
68
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes to Financial Statements
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Arizona Tax Free Portfolio (Arizona Portfolio), Colorado Tax Free Portfolio
(Colorado Portfolio), Connecticut Tax Free Portfolio (Connecticut Portfolio),
Michigan Tax Free Portfolio (Michigan Portfolio), Minnesota Tax Free Portfolio
(Minnesota Portfolio), New Jersey Tax Free Portfolio (New Jersey Portfolio),
Pennsylvania Tax Free Portfolio (Pennsylvania Portfolio) and Texas Tax Free
Portfolio (Texas Portfolio), collectively the Portfolios, are registered under
the Investment Company Act of 1940 as non-diversified open-end management
investment companies which were organized as trusts under the laws of the State
of New York on May 1, 1992. The Declarations of Trust permit the Trustees to
issue interests in the Portfolios. The following is a summary of significant
accounting policies of the Portfolios. The policies are in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.
A. INVESTMENT VALUATIONS -- Municipal bonds are normally valued on the basis of
valuations furnished by a pricing service. Taxable obligations, if any, for
which price quotations are readily available are normally valued at the mean
between the latest bid and asked prices. Futures contracts listed on commodity
exchanges are valued at closing settlement prices. Short-term obligations,
maturing in sixty days or less, are valued at amortized cost, which approximates
value. Investments for which valuations or market quotations are unavailable are
valued at fair value using methods determined in good faith by or at the
direction of the Trustees.
B. INCOME -- Interest income is determined on the basis of interest accrued,
adjusted for amortization of premium or discount when required for federal
income tax purposes.
C. INCOME TAXES -- The Portfolios are treated as partnerships for Federal tax
purposes. No provision is made by the Portfolios for federal or state taxes on
any taxable income of the Portfolios because each investor in the Portfolios are
ultimately responsible for the payment of any taxes. Since some of the
Portfolios' investors are regulated investment companies that invest all or
substantially all of their assets in the Portfolios, the Portfolios normally
must satisfy the applicable source of income and diversification requirements
(under the Internal Revenue Code) in order for their respective investors to
satisfy them. The Portfolios will allocate at least annually among their
respective investors each investor's distributive share of the Portfolios' net
taxable (if any) and tax-exempt investment income, net realized capital
gains, and any other items of income, gain, loss, deductions or credit. Interest
income received by the Portfolios on investments in municipal bonds, which is
excludable from gross income under the Internal Revenue Code, will retain its
status as income exempt from federal income tax when allocated to each
Portfolio's investors. The portion of such interest, if any, earned on private
activity bonds issued after August 7, 1986, may be considered a tax preference
item for investors.
D. DEFERRED ORGANIZATION EXPENSES -- Costs incurred by a Portfolio in connection
with its organization are being amortized on the straight-line basis over five
years beginning on the date each Portfolio commenced operations.
E. FINANCIAL FUTURES CONTRACTS -- Upon the entering of a financial futures
contract, a Portfolio is required to deposit ("initial margin") either in cash
or securities an amount equal to a certain percentage of the purchase price
indicated in the financial futures contract. Subsequent payments are made or
received by a Portfolio ("margin maintenance") each day, dependent on the daily
fluctuations in the value of the underlying security, and are recorded for book
purposes as unrealized gains or losses by a Portfolio. A Portfolio's investment
in financial futures contracts is designed only to hedge against anticipated
future changes in interest rates. Should interest rates move unexpectedly, the
Portfolio may not achieve the anticipated benefits of the financial futures
contracts and may realize a loss.
F. WHEN-ISSUED AND DELAYED DELIVERY TRANSACTIONS -- The Portfolios may engage in
when-issued and delayed delivery transactions. The Portfolio records when-issued
securities on trade date and maintains security positions such that sufficient
liquid assets will be available to make payments for the securities purchased.
Securities purchased on a when-issued or delayed delivery basis are
marked-to-market daily and begin accruing interest on settlement date.
G. OTHER -- Investment transactions are accounted for on a trade date basis.
69
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
(2) INVESTMENT ADVISER FEE AND OTHER TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATES
The investment adviser fee is earned by Boston Management and Research (BMR), a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Eaton Vance Management (EVM), as compensation for
management and investment advisory services rendered to each Portfolio.
The fee is based upon a percentage of average daily net assets plus a percentage
of gross income (i.e., income other than gains from the sale of securities).
For the year ended July 31, 1995, each Portfolio paid advisory fees as follows:
<CAPTION>
AMOUNT EFFECTIVE RATE*
---------- ----------------
<S> <C> <C>
Arizona $ 629,148 0.42%
Colorado 128,496 0.28%
Connecticut 835,605 0.44%
Michigan 856,258 0.44%
Minnesota 310,489 0.37%
New Jersey 1,944,340 0.47%
Pennsylvania 2,416,419 0.48%
Texas 56,319 0.21%
</TABLE>
To enhance the net income of the Colorado Portfolio and the Texas Portfolio, BMR
made a reduction in its fee in the amount of $69,064 and $56,319, respectively,
and $18,606 of expenses related to the operation of the Texas Portfolio were
allocated to BMR.
Except as to Trustees of the Portfolios who are not members of EVM's or BMR's
organization, officers and Trustees receive remuneration for their services to
the Portfolios out of such investment adviser fee. Investors Bank & Trust
Company (IBT), an affiliate of EVM and BMR, serves as custodian of the
Portfolios. Pursuant to the custodian agreements, IBT receives a fee reduced by
credits which are determined based on the average daily cash balances each
Portfolio maintains with IBT. Certain of the officers and Trustees of the
Portfolios are officers and directors/trustees of the above organizations.
Trustees of the Portfolio that are not affiliated with the Investment Adviser
may elect to defer receipt of all or a percentage of their annual fees in
accordance with the terms of the Trustees Deferred Compensation Plan. For the
year ended July 31, 1995, no significant amounts have been deferred.
* Advisory fees paid as a percentage of average daily net assets.
<TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) INVESTMENTS
Purchases and sales of investments, other than U.S. Government securities and
short-term obligations, for the year ended July 31, 1995 were as follows:
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA PORTFOLIO COLORADO PORTFOLIO CONNECTICUT PORTFOLIO MICHIGAN PORTFOLIO
------------------- -------------------- ---------------------- ------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Purchases $31,754,220 $ 23,720,614 $ 55,774,738 $101,893,489
Sales 42,996,767 25,026,530 58,525,219 116,259,363
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA PORTFOLIO NEW JERSEY PORTFOLIO PENNSYLVANIA PORTFOLIO TEXAS PORTFOLIO
------------------- -------------------- ---------------------- ------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Purchases $62,647,201 $219,433,205 $220,102,046 $13,166,608
Sales 62,259,757 237,114,073 264,136,096 13,804,505
</TABLE>
70
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
(4) FEDERAL INCOME TAX BASIS OF INVESTMENTS
The cost and unrealized appreciation/depreciation in value of the investments
owned by each Portfolio at July 31, 1995, as computed on a federal income tax
basis, were as follows:
<CAPTION>
ARIZONA COLORADO CONNECTICUT MICHIGAN
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aggregate Cost $140,218,111 $ 44,277,269 $192,808,845 $182,066,681
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Gross unrealized appreciation $ 6,026,055 $ 1,602,238 $ 3,281,263 $ 6,693,457
Gross unrealized depreciation 2,197,433 442,812 4,835,599 2,233,242
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) $ 3,828,622 $ 1,159,426 $(1,554,336) $ 4,460,215
============ ============ =========== ============
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
MINNESOTA NEW JERSEY PENNSYLVANIA TEXAS
PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO PORTFOLIO
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Aggregate Cost $ 78,851,048 $389,842,758 $477,086,127 $ 26,750,393
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Gross unrealized appreciation $ 2,866,555 $ 15,128,046 $17,966,732 $ 777,979
Gross unrealized depreciation 296,490 1,485,389 3,985,529 356,481
------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
Net unrealized appreciation $ 2,570,065 $ 13,642,657 $13,981,203 $ 421,498
============ ============ =========== ============
</TABLE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) LINE OF CREDIT
The Portfolios participate with other portfolios and funds managed by BMR and
EVM in a $120 million unsecured line of credit agreement with a bank. The line
of credit consists of a $20 million committed facility and a $100 million
discretionary facility. Each Portfolio may temporarily borrow up to 5% of its
total assets to satisfy redemption requests or settle transactions. Interest is
charged to each portfolio or fund based on its borrowings at an amount above
either the bank's adjusted certificate of deposit rate, a variable adjusted
certificate of deposit rate, or a federal funds effective rate. In addition, a
fee computed at an annual rate of 1/4 of 1% on the $20 million committed
facility and on the daily unused portion of the $100 million discretionary
facility is allocated among the participating funds and portfolios at the end of
each quarter. The Portfolios did not have any significant borrowings or
allocated fees during the period. For the Connecticut Portfolio, the average
daily loan balance for the year ended July 31, 1995 was $1,583,254 and the
average interest rate was 7.27%. The maximum borrowings outstanding at any point
during the year were $6,997,000. At July 31, 1995, the Arizona Portfolio had a
$903,000 loan outstanding pursuant to this line of credit.
71
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The Portfolios regularly trade in financial instruments with off-balance sheet
risk in the normal course of their investing activities to assist in managing
exposure to various market risks. These financial instruments include written
options and futures contracts and may involve, to a varying degree, elements of
risk in excess of the amounts recognized for financial statement purposes.
The notional or contractual amounts of these instruments represent the
investment a Portfolio has in particular classes of financial instruments and
does not necessarily represent the amounts potentially subject to risk. The
measurement of the risks associated with these instruments is meaningful only
when all related and offsetting transactions are considered.
<TABLE>
A summary of obligations under these financial instruments at July 31, 1995 is
as follows:
<CAPTION>
FUTURES
CONTRACTS NET UNREALIZED
PORTFOLIO EXPIRATION DATE CONTRACTS POSITION APPRECIATION
- -------------- ---------------- ------------------------- -------- ---------------
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Arizona 9/95 63 U.S. Treasury Bonds Short $ 48,427
Colorado 9/95 39 U.S. Treasury Bonds Short 29,978
Connecticut 9/95 145 U.S. Treasury Bonds Short 111,459
Michigan 9/95 188 U.S. Treasury Bonds Short 135,699
Minnesota 9/95 40 U.S. Treasury Bonds Short 14,497
New Jersey 9/95 125 U.S. Treasury Bonds Short 45,304
Texas 9/95 28 U.S. Treasury Bonds Short 33,773
</TABLE>
At July 31, 1995 each Portfolio had sufficient cash and/or securities to cover
margin requirements on open futures contracts.
The Pennsylvania Portfolio had no obligations outstanding at July 31, 1995.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(7) CHANGE IN FISCAL YEAR
The Portfolios changed their fiscal year end from September 30, to July 31,
effective July 31, 1994.
72
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Independent Auditors' Report
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE TRUSTEES AND INVESTORS OF:
ARIZONA TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
COLORADO TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
CONNECTICUT TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
MICHIGAN TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
MINNESOTA TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
NEW JERSEY TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
PENNSYLVANIA TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
TEXAS TAX FREE PORTFOLIO
We have audited the accompanying statements of assets and liabilities, including
the portfolios of investments, of Arizona Tax Free Portfolio, Colorado Tax Free
Portfolio, Connecticut Tax Free Portfolio, Michigan Tax Free Portfolio,
Minnesota Tax Free Portfolio, New Jersey Tax Free Portfolio, Pennsylvania Tax
Free Portfolio and Texas Tax Free Portfolio as of July 31, 1995 , and the
related statements of operations for the year then ended, and the statements of
changes in net assets and the supplementary data for the year ended July 31,
1995 and the ten months ended July 31, 1994 and for the period from the start of
business, February 1, 1993, to September 30, 1993. These financial statements
and supplementary data are the responsibility of the Trusts' management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements and
supplementary data based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements and supplementary
data are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned at July 31,
1995, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not
received from brokers, we performed other audit procedures. An audit also
includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made
by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
In our opinion, such financial statements and supplementary data present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of Arizona Tax Free Portfolio,
Colorado Tax Free Portfolio, Connecticut Tax Free Portfolio, Michigan Tax Free
Portfolio, Minnesota Tax Free Portfolio, New Jersey Tax Free Portfolio,
Pennsylvania Tax Free Portfolio and Texas Tax Free Portfolio at July 31, 1995,
the results of their operations, the changes in their net assets and their
supplementary data for the respective stated periods in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
AUGUST 25, 1995
73
<PAGE>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Investment Management
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FUNDS OFFICERS INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES
THOMAS J. FETTER DONALD R. DWIGHT
President President, Dwight Partners, Inc.
Chairman, Newspaper of New
JAMES B. HAWKES England, Inc.
Vice President, Trustee
SAMUEL L. HAYES, III
ROBERT B. MACINTOSH Jacob H. Schiff Professor of
Vice President Investment Banking, Harvard
University Graduate School of
JAMES L. O'CONNOR Business Administration
Treasurer
NORTON H. REAMER
THOMAS OTIS President and Director,
Secretary United Asset Management
Corporation
JOHN L. THORNDIKE
Director, Fiduciary Company
Incorporated
JACK L. TREYNOR
Investment Adviser and Consultant
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PORTFOLIOS OFFICERS JAMES L. O'CONNOR
THOMAS J. FETTER Treasurer
President
THOMAS OTIS
JAMES B. HAWKES Secretary
Vice President, Trustee
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES
ROBERT B. MACINTOSH DONALD R. DWIGHT
Vice President of Arizona, President, Dwight Partners, Inc.
Colorado, Connecticut, Chairman, Newspaper of New
Michigan, Minnesota, England, Inc.
New Jersey, Pennsylvania
and Texas SAMUEL L. HAYES, III
Tax Free Portfolios Jacob H. Schiff Professor of
Portfolio Manager of Investment Banking, Harvard
Minnesota and New Jersey University Graduate
Tax Free Portfolios School of Business Administration
CYNTHIA J. CLEMSON NORTON H. REAMER
Vice President and President and Director,
Portfolio Manager of United Asset Management
Arizona and Colorado Tax Corporation
Free Portfolios
JOHN L. THORNDIKE
DAVID C. REILLY Director, Fiduciary Company
Vice President and Incorporated
Portfolio Manager of
Pennsylvania Tax Free JACK L. TREYNOR
Portfolio Investment Adviser and Consultant
NICOLE ANDERES
Vice President and
Portfolio Manager of
Connecticut Tax Free
Portfolio
TIMOTHY T. BROWSE
Vice President and
Portfolio Manager of
Michigan and Texas Tax
Free Portfolios
<PAGE>
-------
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PORTFOLIO INVESTMENT ADVISER
Boston Management and Research
24 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110
FUND ADMINISTRATOR
Eaton Vance Management
24 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110
PRINCIPAL UNDERWRITER
Eaton Vance Distributors, Inc.
24 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110
(617) 482-8260
CUSTODIAN
Investors Bank & Trust Company
24 Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110
TRANSFER AGENT
The Shareholder Services Group, Inc.
BOS725
P.O. Box 1559
Boston, MA 02104
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
Deloitte & Touche LLP
125 Summer Street
Boston, MA 02110
70
<PAGE>
-------
This report must be preceded or accompanied by a current prospectus which
contains more complete information on the Funds, including its distribution
plan, sales charges and expenses. Please read the prospectus carefully before
you invest or send money.
EATON VANCE
MUNICIPALS TRUST
24 FEDERAL STREET
BOSTON, MA 02110
C-TFCSRC
