GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
PART B
(STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION)
FEBRUARY 1, 1996
This Statement of Additional Information, which is not a prospectus,
supplements and should be read in conjunction with the current Prospectus
of General California Municipal Bond Fund, Inc. (the "Fund"), dated
February 1, 1996, as it may be revised from time to time. To obtain a copy
of the Fund's Prospectus, please write to the Fund at 144 Glenn Curtiss
Boulevard, Uniondale, New York 11556-0144, or call toll free 1-800-645-
6561.
The Dreyfus Corporation (the "Manager") serves as the Fund's
investment adviser.
Premier Mutual Fund Services, Inc. (the "Distributor") is the
distributor of the Fund's shares.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Investment Objective and Management Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-2
Management of the Fund. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-11
Management Agreement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-15
Purchase of Shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-17
Service Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-18
Shareholder Services Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-19
Redemption of Shares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-19
Shareholder Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-21
Determination of Net Asset Value. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-24
Portfolio Transactions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-24
Dividends, Distributions and Taxes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-25
Performance Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-27
Information About the Fund. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-28
Transfer and Dividend Disbursing Agent, Custodian,
Counsel and Independent Auditors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-29
Appendix A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-30
Appendix B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-42
Financial Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-50
Report of Independent Auditors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-61
INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE AND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the sections in the Fund's Prospectus entitled
"Description of the Fund" and "Appendix."
Portfolio Securities
The average distribution of investments (at value) in Municipal
Obligations (including notes) by ratings for the fiscal year ended
September 30, 1995, computed on a monthly basis, was as follows:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
Fitch Moody's Standard
Investors Investors & Poor's
Service, L.P. Service, Inc. Ratings Group Percentage
("Fitch") or ("Moody's") or ("S&P") of Value
<S> <C> <C> <C>
AAA Aaa AAA 29.6%
AA Aa AA 17.0
A A A 31.6
BBB Baa BBB 11.6
D D D .3
F-1+/F-1 VMIG1/MIG1, SP-1+/SP-1, 1.6
P-1 A-1
Not Rated Not Rated Not Rated 8.3*
______
100.0%
======
* Included in the Not Rated category are securities comprising 8.3% of the Fund's market value which,
while not rated, have been determined by the Manager to be of comparable quality to securities in the
following rating categories: Aaa/AAA (1.5%), Aa/AA (.1%) and Baa/BBB (6.7%).
</TABLE>
Municipal Obligations. The term "Municipal Obligations" generally
includes debt obligations issued to obtain funds for various public
purposes, including the construction of a wide range of public facilities
such as airports, bridges, highways, housing, hospitals, mass
transportation, schools, streets and water and sewer works. Other public
purposes for which Municipal Obligations may be issued include refunding
outstanding obligations, obtaining funds for general operating expenses and
lending such funds to other public institutions and facilities. In
addition, certain types of industrial development bonds are issued by or on
behalf of public authorities to obtain funds to provide for the
construction, equipment, repair or improvement of privately operated
housing facilities, sports facilities, convention or trade show facilities,
airport, mass transit, industrial, port or parking facilities, air or water
pollution control facilities and certain local facilities for water supply,
gas, electricity or sewage or solid waste disposal; the interest paid on
such obligations may be exempt from Federal income tax, although current
tax laws place substantial limitations on the size of such issues. Such
obligations are considered to be Municipal Obligations if the interest paid
thereon qualifies as exempt from Federal income tax in the opinion of bond
counsel to the issuer. There are, of course, variations in the security of
Municipal Obligations, both within a particular classification and between
classifications.
Floating and variable rate demand obligations are tax exempt
obligations ordinarily having stated maturities in excess of one year, but
which permit the holder to demand payment of principal at any time, or at
specified intervals. The issuer of such obligations ordinarily has a
corresponding right, after a given period, to prepay in its discretion the
outstanding principal amount of the obligation plus accrued interest upon a
specified number of days' notice to the holders thereof. The interest rate
on a floating rate demand obligation is based on a known lending rate, such
as a bank's prime rate, and is adjusted automatically each time such rate
is adjusted. The interest rate on a variable rate demand obligation is
adjusted automatically at specified intervals.
The yields on Municipal Obligations are dependent on a variety of
factors, including general economic and monetary conditions, money market
factors, conditions in the Municipal Obligations market, size of a
particular offering, maturity of the obligation and rating of the issue.
The imposition of the Fund's management fee, as well as other operating
expenses, including fees paid under the Fund's Shareholder Services Plan,
will have the effect of reducing the yield to investors.
Municipal lease obligations or installment purchase contract
obligations (collectively, "lease obligations") have special risks not
ordinarily associated with Municipal Obligations. Although lease
obligations do not constitute general obligations of the municipality for
which the municipality's taxing power is pledged, a lease obligation
ordinarily is backed by the municipality's covenant to budget for,
appropriate and make the payments due under the lease obligation. However,
certain lease obligations contain "non-appropriation" clauses which provide
that the municipality has no obligation to make lease or installment
purchase payments in future years unless money is appropriated for such
purpose on a yearly basis. Although "non-appropriation" lease obligations
are secured by the leased property, disposition of the property in the
event of foreclosure might prove difficult. The staff of the Securities
and Exchange Commission currently considers certain lease obligations to be
illiquid. Determination as to the liquidity of such securities is made in
accordance with guidelines established by the Fund's Board. Pursuant to
such guidelines, the Board has directed the Manager to monitor carefully
the Fund's investment in such securities with particular regard to (1) the
frequency of trades and quotes for the lease obligation; (2) the number of
dealers willing to purchase or sell the lease obligation and the number of
other potential buyers; (3) the willingness of dealers to undertake to make
a market in the lease obligation; (4) the nature of the marketplace trades
including the time needed to dispose of the lease obligation, the method of
soliciting offers and the mechanics of transfer; and (5) such other factors
concerning the trading market for the lease obligation as the Manager may
deem relevant. In addition, in evaluating the liquidity and credit quality
of a lease obligation that is unrated, the Fund's Board has directed the
Manager to consider (a) whether the lease can be cancelled; (b) what
assurance there is that the assets represented by the lease can be sold;
(c) the strength of the lessee's general credit (e.g., its debt,
administrative, economic, and financial characteristics); (d) the
likelihood that the municipality will discontinue appropriating funding for
the leased property because the property is no longer deemed essential to
the operations of the municipality (e.g., the potential for an "event of
nonappropriation"); (e) the legal recourse in the event of failure to
appropriate; and (f) such other factors concerning credit quality as the
Manager may deem relevant. The Fund will not invest more than 15% of the
value of its net assets in lease obligations that are illiquid and in other
illiquid securities.
The Fund will purchase tender option bonds only when it is satisfied
that the custodial and tender option arrangements, including the fee
payment arrangements, will not adversely affect the tax exempt status of
the underlying Municipal Obligations and that payment of any tender fees
will not have the effect of creating taxable income for the Fund. Based on
the tender option bond agreement, the Fund expects to be able to value the
tender option bond at par; however, the value of the instrument will be
monitored to assure that it is valued at fair value.
Ratings of Municipal Obligations. Subsequent to its purchase by the
Fund, an issue of rated Municipal Obligations may cease to be rated or its
rating may be reduced below the minimum required for purchase by the Fund.
Neither event will require the sale of such Municipal Obligations by the
Fund, but the Manager will consider such event in determining whether the
Fund should continue to hold the Municipal Obligations. To the extent that
the ratings given by Moody's, S&P or Fitch for Municipal Obligations may
change as a result of changes in such organizations or their rating
systems, the Fund will attempt to use comparable ratings as standards for
its investments in accordance with the investment policies contained in the
Fund's Prospectus and this Statement of Additional Information. The
ratings of Moody's, S&P and Fitch represent their opinions as to the
quality of the Municipal Obligations which they undertake to rate. It
should be emphasized, however, that ratings are relative and subjective and
are not absolute standards of quality. Although these ratings may be an
initial criterion for selection of portfolio investments, the Manager also
will evaluate these securities.
Illiquid Securities. If a substantial market of qualified
institutional buyers develops for certain restricted securities purchased
by the Fund pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, the Fund intends to treat such securities as liquid securities in
accordance with procedures approved by the Fund's Board. Because it is not
possible to predict with assurance how the market for restricted securities
pursuant to Rule 144A will develop, the Fund's Board has directed the
Manager to monitor carefully the Fund's investments in such securities with
particular regard to trading activity, availability of reliable price
information and other relevant information. To the extent that, for a
period of time, qualified institutional buyers cease purchasing restricted
securities pursuant to Rule 144A, the Fund's investing in such securities
may have the effect of increasing the level of illiquidity in the Fund's
portfolio during such period.
Taxable Investments. Securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S.
Government or its agencies or instrumentalities include U.S. Treasury
securities, which differ in their interest rates, maturities and times of
issuance. Some obligations issued or guaranteed by U.S. Government
agencies and instrumentalities are supported by the full faith and credit
of the U.S. Treasury; others by the right of the issuer to borrow from the
U.S. Treasury; others by discretionary authority of the U.S. Government to
purchase certain obligations of the agency or instrumentality; and others
only by the credit of the agency or instrumentality. These securities bear
fixed, floating or variable rates of interest. While the U.S. Government
provides financial support to such U.S. Government-sponsored agencies or
instrumentalities, no assurance can be given that it will always do so,
since it is not so obligated by law.
Commercial paper consists of short-term, unsecured promissory notes
issued to finance short-term credit needs.
Certificates of deposit are negotiable certificates representing the
obligation of a bank to repay funds deposited with it for a specified
period of time.
Time deposits are non-negotiable deposits maintained in a banking
institution for a specified period of time (in no event longer than seven
days) at a stated interest rate. Investments in time deposits generally
are limited to London branches of domestic banks that have total assets in
excess of one billion dollars. Time deposits which may be held by the Fund
will not benefit from insurance from the Bank Insurance Fund or the Savings
Association Insurance Fund administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation.
Bankers' acceptances are credit instruments evidencing the obligation
of a bank to pay a draft drawn on it by a customer. These instruments
reflect the obligation both of the bank and of the drawer to pay the face
amount of the instrument upon maturity. Other short-term bank obligations
may include uninsured, direct obligations bearing fixed, floating or
variable interest rates.
In a repurchase agreement, the Fund buys, and the seller agrees to
repurchase, a security at a mutually agreed upon time and price (usually
within seven days). The repurchase agreement thereby determines the yield
during the purchaser's holding period, while the seller's obligation to
repurchase is secured by the value of the underlying security. The Fund's
custodian or sub-custodian will have custody of, and will hold in a
segregated account, securities acquired by the Fund under a repurchase
agreement. Repurchase agreements are considered by the staff of the
Securities and Exchange Commission to be loans by the Fund. In an attempt
to reduce the risk of incurring a loss on a repurchase agreement, the Fund
will enter into repurchase agreements only with domestic banks with total
assets in excess of one billion dollars or primary government securities
dealers reporting to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, with respect to
securities of the type in which the Fund may invest, and will require that
additional securities be deposited with it if the value of the securities
purchased should decrease below resale price. Repurchase agreements could
involve risks in the event of a default or insolvency of the other party to
the agreement, including possible delays or restrictions upon the Fund's
ability to dispose of the underlying securities.
Management Policies
Derivatives. The Fund may invest in Derivatives (as defined in the
Prospectus) for a variety of reasons, including to hedge certain market
risks, to provide a substitute for purchasing or selling particular
securities or to increase potential income gain. Derivatives may provide a
cheaper, quicker or more specifically focused way for the Fund to invest
than "traditional" securities would.
Derivatives can be volatile and involve various types and degrees of
risk, depending upon the characteristics of the particular Derivative and
the portfolio as a whole. Derivatives permit the Fund to increase or
decrease the level of risk, or change the character of the risk to which
its portfolio is exposed in much the same way as the Fund can increase or
decrease the level of risk, or change the character of the risk, of its
portfolio by making investments in specific securities.
When required by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Fund will
set aside permissible liquid assets in a segregated account to cover its
obligations relating to its purchase of Derivatives. To maintain this
required cover, the Fund may have to sell portfolio securities at
disadvantageous prices or times since it may not be possible to liquidate a
Derivative position at a reasonable price. Derivatives may be purchased on
established exchanges or through privately negotiated transactions referred
to as over-the-counter Derivatives. Exchange-traded Derivatives generally
are guaranteed by the clearing agency which is the issuer or counterparty
to such Derivatives. This guarantee usually is supported by a daily
payment system (i.e., margin requirements) operated by the clearing agency
in order to reduce overall credit risk. As a result, unless the clearing
agency defaults, there is relatively little counterparty credit risk
associated with Derivatives purchased on an exchange. By contrast, no
clearing agency guarantees over-the-counter Derivatives. Therefore, each
party to an over-the-counter Derivative bears the risk that the
counterparty will default. Accordingly, the Manager will consider the
creditworthiness of counterparties to over-the-counter Derivatives in the
same manner as it would review the credit quality of a security to be
purchased by a Series. Over-the-counter Derivatives are less liquid than
exchange-traded Derivatives since the other party to the transaction may be
the only investor with sufficient understanding of the Derivative to be
interested in bidding for it.
Futures Transactions--In General. The Fund may enter into futures
contracts in U.S. domestic markets, such as the Chicago Board of Trade.
Engaging in these transactions involves risk of loss to the Fund which
could adversely affect the value of the Fund's net assets. Although the
Fund intends to purchase or sell futures contracts only if there is an
active market for such contracts, no assurance can be given that a liquid
market will exist for any particular contract at any particular time. Many
futures exchanges and boards of trade limit the amount of fluctuation
permitted in futures contract prices during a single trading day. Once the
daily limit has been reached in a particular contract, no trades may be
made that day at a price beyond that limit or trading may be suspended for
specified periods during the trading day. Futures contract prices could
move to the limit for several consecutive trading days with little or no
trading, thereby preventing prompt liquidation of futures positions and
potentially subjecting the Fund to substantial losses.
Successful use of futures by the Fund also is subject to the Manager's
ability to predict correctly movements in the direction of the relevant
market and, to the extent the transaction is entered into for hedging
purposes, to ascertain the appropriate correlation between the transaction
being hedged and the price movements of the futures contract. For example,
if the Fund uses futures to hedge against the possibility of a decline in
the market value of securities held in its portfolio and the prices of such
securities instead increase, the Fund will lose part or all of the benefit
of the increased value of securities which it has hedged because it will
have offsetting losses in its futures positions. Furthermore, if in such
circumstances the Fund has insufficient cash, it may have to sell
securities to meet daily variation margin requirements. The Fund may have
to sell such securities at a time when it may be disadvantageous to do so.
Pursuant to regulations and/or published positions of the Securities
and Exchange Commission, The Fund may be required to segregate cash or high
quality money market instruments in connection with its commodities
transactions in an amount generally equal to the value of the underlying
commodity. The segregation of such assets will have the effect of limiting
the Fund's ability otherwise to invest those assets.
Specific Futures Transactions. The Fund may purchase and sell
interest rate futures contracts. An interest rate future obligates the
Fund to purchase or sell an amount of a specific debt security at a future
date at a specific price.
Options--In General. The Fund may purchase and write (i.e., sell)
call or put options with respect to specific securities. A call option
gives the purchaser of the option the right to buy, and obligates the
writer to sell, the underlying security or securities at the exercise price
at any time during the option period, or at a specific date. Conversely, a
put option gives the purchaser of the option the right to sell, and
obligates the writer to buy, the underlying security or securities at the
exercise price at any time during the option period.
A covered call option written by the Fund is a call option with
respect to which the Fund owns the underlying security or otherwise covers
the transaction by segregating cash or other securities. A put option
written by the Fund is covered when, among other things, cash or liquid
securities having a value equal to or greater than the exercise price of
the option are placed in a segregated account with the Fund's custodian to
fulfill the obligation undertaken. The principal reason for writing
covered call and put options is to realize, through the receipt of
premiums, a greater return than would be realized on the underlying
securities alone. The Fund receives a premium from writing covered call or
put options which it retains whether or not the option is exercised.
There is no assurance that sufficient trading interest to create a
liquid secondary market on a securities exchange will exist for any
particular option or at any particular time, and for some options no such
secondary market may exist. A liquid secondary market in an option may
cease to exist for a variety of reasons. In the past, for example, higher
than anticipated trading activity or order flow, or other unforeseen
events, at times have rendered certain of the clearing facilities
inadequate and resulted in the institution of special procedures, such as
trading rotations, restrictions on certain types of orders or trading halts
or suspensions in one or more options. There can be no assurance that
similar events, or events that may otherwise interfere with the timely
execution of customers' orders, will not recur. In such event, it might
not be possible to effect closing transactions in particular options. If,
as a covered call option writer, the Fund is unable to effect a closing
purchase transaction in a secondary market, it will not be able to sell the
underlying security until the option expires or it delivers the underlying
security upon exercise or it otherwise covers its position.
Future Developments. The Fund may take advantage of opportunities in
the area of options and futures contracts and options on futures contracts
and any other Derivatives which are not presently contemplated for use by
the Fund or which are not currently available but which may be developed,
to the extent such opportunities are both consistent with the Fund's
investment objective and legally permissible for the Fund. Before entering
into such transactions or making any such investment, the Fund will provide
appropriate disclosure in its Prospectus or Statement of Additional
Information.
Forward Commitments. Municipal Obligations and other securities
purchased on a forward commitment or when-issued basis are subject to
changes in value (generally changing in the same way, i.e., appreciating
when interest rates decline and depreciating when interest rates rise)
based upon the public's perception of the creditworthiness of the issuer
and changes, real or anticipated, in the level of interest rates.
Securities purchased on a forward commitment or when-issued basis may
expose the Fund to risks because they may experience such fluctuations
prior to their actual delivery. Purchasing securities on a when-issued
basis can involve the additional risk that the yield available in the
market when the delivery takes place actually may be higher than that
obtained in the transaction itself. Purchasing securities on a forward
commitment or when-issued basis when the Fund is fully or almost fully
invested may result in greater potential fluctuation in the value of the
Fund's net assets and its net asset value per share.
Lending Portfolio Securities. In connection with its securities
lending transactions, the Fund may return to the borrower or a third party
which is unaffiliated with the Fund, and which is acting as a "placing
broker," a part of the interest earned from the investment of collateral
received from securities loaned.
The Securities and Exchange Commission currently requires that the
following conditions must be met whenever portfolio securities are loaned:
(1) the Fund must receive at least 100% cash collateral from the borrower;
(2) the borrower must increase such collateral whenever the market value of
the securities rises above the level of such collateral; (3) the Fund must
be able to terminate the loan at any time; (4) the Fund must receive
reasonable interest on the loan, as well as any interest or other
distributions payable on the loaned securities, and any increase in market
value; and (5) the Fund may pay only reasonable custodian fees in
connection with the loan. These conditions may be subject to future
modification.
Investment Considerations and Risks
Investing in California Municipal Obligations. Investors should
consider carefully the special risks inherent in the Fund's investment in
California Municipal Obligations. These risks result from certain
amendments to the California Constitution and other statues that limit the
taxing and spending authority of California governmental entities, as well
as from the general financial condition of the State of California. From
mid-1990 to late 1993, the State suffered a recession with the worst
economic, fiscal and budget conditions since the 1930s. As a result, the
State experienced recurring budget deficits for four of its five fiscal
years ended June 30, 1992. The State had operating surpluses of
approximately $109 million in fiscal 1992-93 and $917 million in 1993-94.
However, at June 30, 1994, according to California's Department of Finance,
the State's Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties had an accumulated
deficit, on a budget basis, of approximately $1.8 billion. A further
consequence of the large budget imbalances over the last three fiscal years
has been that the State depleted its available cash resources and has had
to use a series of external borrowings to meet its cash needs. To meet its
cash flow needs in the 1994-95 fiscal year, the State issued, in July and
August 1994, $4.0 billion of revenue anticipation warrants and $3.0 billion
of revenue anticipation notes. The 1994-95 budget Act contains a plan to
retire a projected $1.025 billion deficit in the 1995-96 fiscal year. The
Department of Finance projects that, after repaying the last of the
carryover budget deficit, there will be a positive balance of $28 million
in the Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties at June 30, 1996. As a
result of the deterioration of the State's budget and cash situation
between October 1991 and July 1994, the rating on the State's general
obligation bonds was reduced by S&P from AAA to A, by Moody's from Aaa to
A1 and by Fitch AAA to A. These and other factors may have the effect of
impairing the ability of the issuers of California Municipal Obligations to
pay interest on, or repay principal of, such California Municipal
Obligations. Investors should review "Appendix A" which sets forth
additional information relating to investing in California Municipal
Obligations.
Lower Rated Bonds. The Fund is permitted to invest in securities
rated Ba or lower by Moody's or BB or lower by S&P and Fitch and as low as
the lowest rating assigned by Moody's, S&P or Fitch. Such bonds, though
higher yielding, are characterized by risk. See "Description of the Fund--
Investment Considerations and Risks--Lower Rated Bonds" in the Prospectus
for a discussion of certain risks and "Appendix B" for a general
description of Moody's, S&P and Fitch ratings of Municipal Obligations.
Although ratings may be useful in evaluating the safety of interest and
principal payments, they do not evaluate the market value risk of these
bonds. The Fund will rely on the Manager's judgment, analysis and
experience in evaluating the creditworthiness of an issuer.
Investors should be aware that the market values of many of these
bonds tend to be more sensitive to economic conditions than are higher
rated securities. These bonds generally are considered by Moody's, S&P and
Fitch to be predominantly speculative with respect to capacity to pay
interest and repay principal in accordance with the terms of the obligation
and generally will involve more credit risk than securities in the higher
rating categories.
Because there is no established retail secondary market for many of
these securities, the Fund anticipates that such securities could be sold
only to a limited number of dealers or institutional investors. To the
extent a secondary trading market for these bonds does exist, it generally
is not as liquid as the secondary market for higher rated securities. The
lack of a liquid secondary market may have an adverse impact on market
price and yield and the Fund's ability to dispose of particular issues when
necessary to meet the Fund's liquidity needs or in response to a specific
economic event such as a deterioration in the creditworthiness of the
issuer. The lack of a liquid secondary market for certain securities also
may make it more difficult for the Fund to obtain accurate market
quotations for purposes of valuing the Fund's portfolio and calculating its
net asset value. Adverse publicity and investor perceptions, whether or
not based on fundamental analysis, may decrease the values and liquidity of
these securities. In such cases, judgment may play a greater role in
valuation because less reliable, objective data may be available.
These bonds may be particularly susceptible to economic downturns. It
is likely that any economic recession could disrupt severely the market for
such securities and may have an adverse impact on the value of such
securities. In addition, it is likely that any such economic downturn
could adversely affect the ability of the issuers of such securities to
repay principal and pay interest thereon and increase the incidence of
default for such securities.
The Fund may acquire these bonds during an initial offering. Such
securities may involve special risks because they are new issues. The Fund
has no arrangement with any persons concerning the acquisition of such
securities, and the Manager will review carefully the credit and other
characteristics pertinent to such new issues.
The credit risk factors pertaining to lower rated securities also
apply to lower rated zero coupon bonds and pay-in-kind bonds in which the
Fund may invest up to 5% of its net assets. Such zero coupon, pay-in-kind
or delayed interest bonds carry an additional risk in that, unlike bonds
which pay interest throughout the period to maturity, the Fund will realize
no cash until the cash payment date unless a portion of such securities are
sold and, if the issuer defaults, the Fund may obtain no return at all on
its investment. See "Dividends, Distributions and Taxes."
Investment Restrictions
The Fund has adopted investment restrictions numbered 1 through 9 as
fundamental policies, which cannot be changed without approval by the
holders of a majority (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as
amended (the "1940 Act")) of the Fund's outstanding voting shares.
Investment restrictions numbered 10 and 11 are not fundamental policies and
may be changed by a vote of a majority of the Fund's Board members at any
time. The Fund may not:
1. Purchase securities other than Municipal Obligations and Taxable
Investments and those arising out of transactions in futures and options or
as otherwise provided in the Fund's Prospectus.
2. Borrow money, except to the extent permitted under the 1940 Act
(which currently limits borrowing to no more than 33-1/3% of the value of
the Fund's total assets). Transactions in futures and options do not
involve any borrowings for purposes of this restriction.
3. Sell securities short or purchase securities on margin, except for
such short-term credits as are necessary for the clearance of transactions,
but the Fund may make margin deposits in connection with transactions in
futures, including those related to indices, and options on futures
contracts or indices.
4. Underwrite the securities of other issuers, except that the Fund
may bid separately or as part of a group for the purchase of Municipal
Obligations directly from an issuer for its own portfolio to take advantage
of the lower purchase price available.
5. Purchase, hold or deal in real estate, real estate investment
trust securities or oil and gas interests, but the Fund may invest in
Municipal Obligations secured by real estate or interests therein.
6. Invest in commodities, except that the Fund may purchase and sell
futures contracts, including those relating to indices, and options on
futures contracts or indices, as described in the Fund's Prospectus.
7. Lend any funds or other assets, except through the purchase of
qualified debt obligations and the entry into repurchase agreements
referred to above and in the Fund's Prospectus; however, the Fund may lend
its portfolio securities in an amount not to exceed 33-1/3% of the value of
its total assets. Any loans of portfolio securities will be made according
to guidelines established by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the
Fund's Board.
8. Invest more than 25% of its total assets in the securities of
issuers in any single industry; provided that there shall be no such
limitation on the purchase of Municipal Obligations and, for temporary
defensive purposes, obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S.
Government, its agencies or instrumentalities.
9. Purchase securities of other investment companies, except as they
may be acquired as part of a merger, consolidation or acquisition of
assets.
10. Pledge, mortgage, hypothecate, or otherwise encumber its assets,
except to the extent necessary to secure permitted borrowings, and except
to the extent related to the deposit of assets in escrow in connection with
the purchase of securities on a when-issued or delayed-delivery basis and
collateral and initial or variation margin arrangements with respect to
futures contracts, including those relating to indices, and options on
futures contracts or indices.
11. Enter into repurchase agreements providing for settlement in more
than seven days after notice or purchase securities which are illiquid if,
in the aggregate, more than 15% of the value of the Fund's net assets would
be so invested.
In addition, the Fund will not issue any senior security (as such term
is defined in Section 18(f) of the 1940 Act), except to the extent the
activities permitted in Investment Restriction Nos. 2, 3, 6 and 10 may be
deemed to give rise to a senior security.
For purposes of Investment Restriction No. 8, industrial development
bonds, where the payment of principal and interest is the ultimate
responsibility of companies within the same industry, are grouped together
as an "industry."
If a percentage restriction is adhered to at the time of investment, a
later increase or decrease in percentage resulting from a change in values
or assets will not constitute a violation of such restriction.
The Fund may make commitments more restrictive than the restrictions
listed above so as to permit the sale of Fund shares in certain states.
Should the Fund determine that a commitment is no longer in the best
interests of the Fund and its shareholders, the Fund reserves the right to
revoke the commitment by terminating the sale of Fund shares in the state
involved.
MANAGEMENT OF THE FUND
Board members and officers of the Fund, together with information as
to their principal business occupations during at least the last five
years, are shown below. Each Board member who is deemed to be an
"interested person" of the Fund, as defined in the 1940 Act, is indicated
by an asterisk.
Board Members of the Fund
CLIFFORD L. ALEXANDER, JR., Board Member. President of Alexander &
Associates, Inc., a management consulting firm. From 1977 to 1981,
Mr. Alexander served as Secretary of the Army and Chairman of the
Board of the Panama Canal Company, and from 1975 to 1977, he was a
member of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Verner, Liipfert, Bernhard,
McPherson and Alexander. He is a director of American Home Products
Corporation, The Dun & Bradstreet Corporation, MCI Communications
Corporation and Mutual of America Life Insurance Company. He is 62
years old and his address is 400 C Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.
20002.
PEGGY C. DAVIS, Board Member. Shad Professor of Law, New York University
School of Law. Professor Davis has been a member of the New York
University law faculty since 1983. Prior to that time, she served for
three years as a judge in the courts of New York State; was engaged
for eight years in the practice of law, working in both corporate and
non-profit sectors; and served for two years as a criminal justice
administrator in the government of the City of New York. She writes
and teaches in the fields of evidence, constitutional theory, family
law, social sciences and the law, legal process and professional
methodology and training. She is 52 years old and her address is
c/o New York University School of Law, 249 Sullivan Street, New York,
New York 10011.
*JOSEPH S. DiMARTINO, Chairman of the Board. Since January 1995, Chairman
of the Board of various funds in the Dreyfus Family of Funds. For
more than five years prior thereto, he was President, a director and,
until August 1994, Chief Operating Officer of the Manager and
Executive Vice President and a director of Dreyfus Service
Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager and, until
August 24, 1994, the Fund's distributor. From August 1994 to December
31, 1994, he was a director of Mellon Bank Corporation. He is
Chairman of the Board of Directors of Noel Group, Inc., a trustee of
Bucknell University and a director of the Muscular Dystrophy
Association, HealthPlan Services Corporation, Belding Heminway, Inc.,
Curtis Industries, Inc., and Staffing Resources, Inc. He is 52 years
old and his address is 200 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10166.
ERNEST KAFKA, Board Member. A physician engaged in private practice
specializing in the psychoanalysis of adults and adolescents. Since
1981, he has served as an Instructor at the New York Psychoanalytic
Institute and, prior thereto, held other teaching positions. He is
Associate Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at Cornell Medical School.
For more than the past five years, Dr. Kafka has held numerous
administrative positions, including President of The New York
Psychoanalytic Society, and has published many articles on subjects in
the field of psychoanalysis. He is 62 years old and his address is 23
East 92nd Street, New York, New York 10128.
SAUL B. KLAMAN, Board Member. Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of SBK
Associates, which provides research and consulting services to
financial institutions. Dr. Klaman was President of the National
Association of Mutual Savings Banks until November 1983, President of
the National Council of Savings Institutions until June 1985, Vice
Chairman of Golembe Associates and BEI Golembe, Inc. until 1989 and
Chairman Emeritus of BEI Golembe, Inc. until November 1992. He also
served as an Economist to the Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System and on several Presidential Commissions, and has held
numerous consulting and advisory positions in the fields of economics
and housing finance. He is 76 years old and his address is 431-B
Dedham Street, The Gables, Newton Center, Massachusetts 02159.
NATHAN LEVENTHAL, Board Member. President of Lincoln Center for the
Performing Arts, Inc. Mr. Leventhal was Deputy Mayor for Operations
of New York City from September 1979 until March 1984 and Commissioner
of the Department of Housing Preservation and Development of New York
City from February 1978 to September 1979. Mr. Leventhal was an
associate and then a member of the New York law firm of Poletti
Freidin Prashker Feldman and Gartner from 1974 to 1978. He was
Commissioner of Rent and Housing Maintenance for New York City from
1972 to 1973. Mr. Leventhal serves as Chairman of Citizens Union, an
organization which strives to reform and modernize city and state
government. He is 52 years old and his address is 70 Lincoln Center
Plaza, New York, New York 10023-6583.
For so long as the Fund's plans described in the sections captioned
"Service Plan" and "Shareholder Services Plan" remain in effect, the Board
members of the Fund who are not "interested persons" of the Fund, as
defined in the 1940 Act, will be selected and nominated by the Board
members who are not "interested persons" of the Fund.
The Fund typically pays its Board members an annual retainer and a per
meeting fee and reimburses them for their expenses. The Chairman of the
Board receives an additional 25% of such compensation. Emeritus Board
members are entitled to receive an annual retainer and a per meeting fee of
one-half the amount paid to them as Board members. The aggregate amount of
compensation paid to each Board member by the Fund for the fiscal year
ended September 30, 1995, and by all other funds in the Dreyfus Family of
Funds for which such person is a Board member (the number of which is set
forth in parenthesis next to each Board member's total compensation) for
the year ended December 31, 1995 is as follows:
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
(3) (5)
(2) Pension or (4) Total Compensation
(1) Aggregate Retirement Benefits Estimated Annual from Fund and Fund
Name of Board Compensation from Accrued as Part of Benefits Upon Complex Paid to
Member Fund* Fund's Expenses Retirement Board Member
<S> <C> <C> <C> <C>
Clifford L. Alexander, Jr. $3,750 none none $73,210(17)
Peggy C. Davis $3,750 none none $61,751(15)
Joseph S. DiMartino $3,814 none none $445,000**(94)
Ernest Kafka $3,750 none none $61,001(15)
Saul B. Klaman $3,750 none none $61,751(15)
Nathan Leventhal $3,750 none none $61,751(15)
* Amount does not include reimbursed expenses for attending Board meetings, which amounted to $303 for all Board members
as a group.
** Estimated amount for the year ended December 31, 1995.
</TABLE>
Officers of the Fund
MARIE E. CONNOLLY, President and Treasurer. President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Distributor and an officer of other investment
companies advised or administered by the Manager. From December 1991
to July 1994, she was President and Chief Compliance Officer of Funds
Distributor, Inc., the ultimate parent of which is Boston
Institutional Group, Inc. Prior to December 1991, she served as Vice
President and Controller, and later as Senior Vice President, of The
Boston Company Advisors, Inc. She is 38 years old.
JOHN E. PELLETIER, Vice President and Secretary. Senior Vice President and
General Counsel of the Distributor and an officer of other investment
companies advised or administered by the Manager. From February 1992
to July 1994, he served as Counsel for The Boston Company Advisors,
Inc. From August 1990 to February 1992, he was employed as an
Associate at Ropes & Gray, and prior thereto, he was employed as an
Associate at Sidley & Austin. He is 31 years old.
FREDERICK C. DEY, Vice President and Assistant Treasurer. Senior Vice
President of the Distributor and an officer of other investment
companies advised or administered by the Manager. From 1988 to August
1994, he was Manager of the High Performance Fabric Division of
Springs Industries Inc. He is 33 years old.
ERIC B. FISCHMAN, Vice President and Assistant Secretary. Associate
General Counsel of the Distributor and an officer of other investment
companies advised or administered by the Manager. From September 1992
to August 1994, he was an attorney with the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System. He is 30 years old.
ELIZABETH BACHMAN, Vice President and Assistant Secretary. Assistant Vice
President of the Distributor and an officer of other investment
companies advised or administered by the Manager. From September 1992
to May 1995, she was enrolled at the Fordham University School of Law,
from which she received her J.D. Prior to September 1992, she was an
Assistant at the National Association for Public Interest Law. She
received her B.S. from Cornell University in May 1991. She is 26
years old.
JOSEPH S. TOWER,III, Assistant Treasurer. Senior Vice President, Treasurer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Distributor and an officer of other
investment companies advised or administered by the Manager. From
July 1988 to August 1994, he was employed by The Boston Company, Inc.
where he held various management positions in the Corporate Finance
and Treasury areas. He is 33 years old.
JOHN J. PYBURN, Assistant Treasurer. Assistant Treasurer of the
Distributor and an officer of other investment companies advised or
administered by the Manager. From 1984 to July 1994, he was Assistant
Vice President in the Mutual Fund Accounting Department of the
Manager. He is 60 years old.
MARGARET PARDO, Assistant Secretary. Legal Assistant with the Distributor
and an officer of other investment companies advised or administered
by the Manager. From June 1992 to April 1995 she was a Medical
Coordination Officer at ORBIS International. Prior to June 1992, she
worked as Program Coordinator at Physicians World Communications
Group. She is 27 years old.
The address of each officer of the Fund is 200 Park Avenue, New York,
New York 10166.
Board members and officers of the Fund, as a group, owned less than 1%
of the Fund's Common Stock outstanding on January 19, 1996.
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "Management
of the Fund."
The Manager provides management services pursuant to the Management
Agreement (the "Agreement") dated August 24, 1994 with the Fund, which is
subject to annual approval by (i) the Fund's Board or (ii) vote of a
majority (as defined in the 1940 Act) of the outstanding voting securities
of the Fund, provided that in either event the continuance also is approved
by a majority of the Board members who are not "interested persons" (as
defined in the 1940 Act) of the Fund or the Manager, by vote cast in person
at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on such approval. The
Agreement was approved by shareholders on August 3, 1994, and was last
approved by the Fund's Board, including a majority of the Board members who
are not "interested persons" of any party to the Agreement, at a meeting
held on September 27, 1995. The Agreement is terminable without penalty,
on 60 days' notice, by the Fund's Board or by vote of the holders of a
majority of the Fund's shares, or, on not less than 90 days' notice, by the
Manager. The Agreement will terminate automatically in the event of its
assignment (as defined in the 1940 Act).
The following persons are officers and/or directors of the Manager:
Howard Stein, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer; W. Keith
Smith, Vice Chairman of the Board; Christopher M. Condron, President, Chief
Operating Officer and a director; Stephen E. Canter, Vice Chairman, Chief
Investment Officer and a director; Lawrence S. Kash, Vice Chairman-
Distribution and a director; Philip L. Toia, Vice Chairman-Operations and
Administration and a director; William T. Sandalls, Jr., Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer; Barbara E. Casey, Vice President-Dreyfus
Retirement Services; Diane M. Coffey, Vice President-Corporate
Communications; Elie M. Genadry, Vice President-Institutional Sales;
William F. Glavin, Jr., Vice President-Corporate Development; Mark N.
Jacobs, Vice President-Legal and Secretary; Daniel C. Maclean, Vice
President and General Counsel; Jeffrey N. Nachman, Vice President-Mutual
Fund Accounting; Andrew S. Wasser, Vice President-Information Services;
Maurice Bendrihem, Controller; Elvira Oslapas, Assistant Secretary; and
Mandell L. Berman, Frank V. Cahouet, Alvin E. Friedman, Lawrence M. Greene
and Julian M. Smerling, directors.
The Manager manages the Fund's portfolio of investments in accordance
with the stated policies of the Fund, subject to the approval of the Fund's
Board. The Manager is responsible for investment decisions, and provides
the Fund with portfolio managers who are authorized by the Fund's Board to
execute purchases and sales of securities. The Fund's portfolio managers
are Joseph P. Darcy, A. Paul Disdier, Douglas J. Gaylor, Karen M. Hand,
Stephen C. Kris, Richard J. Moynihan, Jill C. Shaffro, L. Lawrence
Troutman, Samuel J. Weinstock and Monica S. Wieboldt. The Manager also
maintains a research department with a professional staff of portfolio
managers and securities analysts who provide research services for the Fund
as well as for other funds advised by the Manager. All purchases and sales
are reported for the Board's review at the meeting subsequent to such
transactions.
All expenses incurred in the operation of the Fund are borne by the
Fund, except to the extent specifically assumed by the Manager. The
expenses borne by the Fund include, without limitation: organizational
costs, taxes, interest, loan commitment fees, interest and distributions
paid on securities sold short, brokerage fees and commissions, if any, fees
of Board members who are not officers, directors, employees or holder of 5%
or more of the outstanding voting securities of the Manager, Securities and
Exchange Commission fees, state Blue Sky qualification fees, advisory fees,
charges of custodians, transfer and dividend disbursing agents' fees,
certain insurance premiums, industry association fees, outside auditing and
legal expenses, costs of maintaining corporate existence, costs of
independent pricing services, costs attributable to investor services
(including, without limitation, telephone and personnel expenses), costs of
preparing and printing prospectuses and statements of additional
information for regulatory purposes and for distribution to existing
shareholders, costs of shareholders' reports and meetings, and any
extraordinary expenses.
The Manager maintains office facilities on behalf of the Fund, and
furnishes statistical and research data, clerical help, accounting, data
processing, bookkeeping and internal auditing and certain other required
services to the Fund. The Manager also may make such advertising and
promotional expenditures, using its own resources, as it from time to time
deems appropriate.
As compensation for the Manager's services, the Fund has agreed to pay
the Manager a monthly management fee at the annual rate of .60 of 1% of the
value of the Fund's average daily net assets. All fees and expenses are
accrued daily and deducted before payment of dividends to investors. For
the fiscal years ended September 30, 1993, 1994 and 1995, the management
fees payable amounted to $2,487,070, $2,351,917 and $1,897,821,
respectively, which amounts were reduced by $457,057 in fiscal 1993
pursuant to undertakings in effect, resulting in net fees paid to the
Manager of $2,030,013 in fiscal 1993.
The Manager has agreed that if in any fiscal year the aggregate
expenses of the Fund, exclusive of taxes, brokerage, interest on borrowings
and (with the prior written consent of the necessary state securities
commissions) extraordinary expenses, but including the management fee,
exceed the expense limitation of any state having jurisdiction over the
Fund, the Fund may deduct from the payment to be made to the Manager under
the Agreement, or the Manager will bear, such excess expense to the extent
required by state law. Such deduction or payment, if any, will be
estimated daily, and reconciled and effected or paid, as the case may be,
on a monthly basis.
The aggregate of the fees payable to the Manager is not subject to
reduction as the value of the Fund's net assets increases.
PURCHASE OF SHARES
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "How to Buy
Shares."
The Distributor. The Distributor serves as the Fund's distributor on
a best efforts basis pursuant to an agreement dated August 24, 1994. The
Distributor also acts as distributor for the other funds in the Dreyfus
Family of Funds and for certain other investment companies. In some
states, certain financial institutions effecting transactions in Fund
shares may be required to register as dealers pursuant to state law.
Dreyfus TeleTransfer Privilege. Dreyfus TeleTransfer purchase orders
may be made at any time. Purchase orders received by 4:00 P.M., New York
time, on any business day that Dreyfus Transfer, Inc., the Fund's transfer
and dividend disbursing agent (the "Transfer Agent"), and the New York
Stock Exchange are open for business will be credited to the shareholder's
Fund account on the next bank business day following such purchase order.
Purchase orders made after 4:00 P.M., New York time, on any business day
the Transfer Agent and the New York Sock Exchange are open for business, or
orders made on Saturday, Sunday or any Fund holiday (e.g., when the New
York Stock Exchange is not open for business), will be credited to the
shareholder's Fund account on the second bank business day following such
purchase order. To qualify to use the Dreyfus TeleTransfer Privilege, the
initial payment for purchase of Fund shares must be drawn on, and
redemption proceeds paid to, the same bank and account as are designated on
the Account Application or Shareholder Services Form on file. If the
proceeds of a particular redemption are to be wired to an account at any
other bank, the request must be in writing and signature-guaranteed. See
"Redemption of Shares--Dreyfus TeleTransfer Privilege."
Reopening an Account. An investor may reopen an account with a
minimum investment of $100 without filing a new Account Application during
the calendar year the account is closed or during the following calendar
year, provided the information on the old Account Application is still
applicable.
SERVICE PLAN
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "Service
Plan."
Rule 12b-1 (the "Rule") adopted by the Securities and Exchange
Commission under the 1940 Act provides, among other things, that an
investment company may bear expenses of distributing its shares only
pursuant to a plan adopted in accordance with the Rule. The Fund's Board
has adopted, but not implemented, such a plan (the "Service Plan") pursuant
to which the Fund may (i) reimburse the Distributor for payments to certain
financial institutions (which may include banks), securities dealers and
other financial industry professionals (collectively, "Service Agents") for
distributing the Fund's shares and servicing shareholder accounts and (ii)
pay the Manager, Dreyfus Service Corporation and any affiliate of either of
them for advertising and marketing relating to the Fund and for servicing
shareholder accounts. The Fund's Board believes that there is a reasonable
likelihood that the Plan may benefit the Fund and its shareholders.
A quarterly report of the amounts expended under the Service Plan, and
the purposes for which such expenditures were incurred, must be made to the
Board for its review. In addition, the Service Plan provides that it may
not be amended to increase materially the costs which the Fund may bear for
distribution pursuant to the Service Plan without shareholder approval and
that other material amendments of the Service Plan must be approved by the
Board, and by the Board members who are not "interested persons" (as
defined in the 1940 Act) of the Fund or the Manager and have no direct or
indirect financial interest in the operation of the Service Plan or in the
related service agreements, by vote cast in person at a meeting called for
the purpose of considering such amendments. The Service Plan and the
related service agreements are subject to annual approval by such vote of
the Board members cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of
voting on the Service Plan. The Service Plan was last so approved at a
meeting held on September 27, 1995. The Plan is terminable at any time by
vote of a majority of the Board members who are not "interested persons"
and have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the
Service Plan or in any of the related service agreements or by vote of a
majority of the Fund's shares.
Management of the Fund currently does not intend to implement the
Service Plan and will only do so if prior written notice is given to
shareholders.
SHAREHOLDER SERVICES PLAN
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "Shareholder
Services Plan."
The Fund has adopted a Shareholder Service Plan pursuant to which the
Fund reimburses Dreyfus Service Corporation for certain allocated expenses
of providing personal services and/or maintaining shareholder accounts.
The services provided may include personal services relating to shareholder
accounts, such as answering shareholder inquiries regarding the Fund and
providing reports and other information, and services related to the
maintenance of shareholder accounts.
A quarterly report of the amounts expended under the Shareholder
Services Plan, and the purposes for which such expenditures were incurred,
must be made to the Board for its review. In addition, the Shareholder
Services Plan provides that material amendments of the Shareholder Services
Plan must be approved by the Board, and by the Board members who are not
"interested persons" (as defined in the 1940 Act) of the Fund and have no
direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the Shareholder
Services Plan by vote of the Board members cast in person at a meeting
called for the purpose of considering such amendments. The Shareholder
Services Plan is subject to annual approval by such vote of the Board
members cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on the
Shareholder Services Plan. The Shareholder Services Plan is terminable at
any time by vote of a majority of the Board members who are not "interested
persons" and have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operation
of the Shareholder Services Plan.
During the fiscal year ended September 30, 1995, the Fund was charged
an aggregate $143,052 pursuant to the Shareholder Services Plan.
REDEMPTION OF SHARES
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "How to
Redeem Shares."
Check Redemption Privilege. An investor may indicate on the Account
Application, Shareholder Services Form or by later written request that the
Fund provide Redemption Checks ("Checks") drawn on the investor's Fund
account. Checks will be sent only to the registered owner(s) of the
account and only to the address of record. The Account Application,
Shareholder Services Form or later written request must be manually signed
by the registered owner(s). Checks may be made payable to the order of any
person in an amount of $500 or more. When a Check is presented to the
Transfer Agent for payment, the Transfer Agent, as the investor's agent,
will cause the Fund to redeem a sufficient number of full and fractional
shares in the investor's account to cover the amount of the Check.
Dividends are earned until the Check clears. After clearance, a copy of
the Check will be returned to the investor. Investors generally will be
subject to the same rules and regulations that apply to checking accounts,
although election of this Privilege creates only a shareholder-transfer
agent relationship with the Transfer Agent.
If the amount of the Check is greater than the value of the shares in
an investor's account, the Check will be returned marked insufficient
funds. Checks should not be used to close an account.
Wire Redemption Privilege. By using this Privilege, the investor
authorizes the Transfer Agent to act on wire or telephone redemption
instructions from any person representing himself or herself to be the
investor, or a representative of the investor's Service Agent, and
reasonably believed by the Transfer Agent to be genuine. Ordinarily, the
Fund will initiate payment for shares redeemed pursuant to this Privilege
on the next business day after receipt by the Transfer Agent of the
redemption request in proper form. Redemption proceeds ($1,000 minimum)
will be transferred by Federal Reserve wire only to the commercial bank
account specified by the investor on the Account Application or Shareholder
Services Form, or to a correspondent bank if the investor's bank is not a
member of the Federal Reserve System. Fees ordinarily are imposed by such
bank and are borne by the investor. Immediate notification by the
correspondent bank to the investor's bank is necessary to avoid a delay in
crediting the funds to the investor's bank account.
Investors with access to telegraphic equipment may wire redemption
requests to the Transfer Agent by employing the following transmittal code
which may be used for domestic or overseas transmission:
Transfer Agent's
Transmittal Code Answer Back Sign
144295 144295 TSSG PREP
Investors who do not have direct access to telegraphic equipment may
have the wire transmitted by contacting a TRT Cables operator at
1-800-654-7171, toll free. Investors should advise the operator that the
above transmittal code must be used and should also inform the operator of
the Transfer Agent's answer back sign.
To change the commercial bank or account designated to receive
redemption proceeds, a written request must be sent to the Transfer Agent.
This request must be signed by each shareholder, with each signature
guaranteed as described below under "Stock Certificates; Signatures."
Dreyfus TeleTransfer Privilege. Investors should be aware that if
they have selected the Dreyfus TeleTransfer Privilege, any request for a
wire redemption will be effected as a Dreyfus TeleTransfer transaction
through the Automated Clearing House ("ACH") system unless more prompt
transmittal specifically is requested. Redemption proceeds will be on
deposit in the investor's account at an ACH member bank ordinarily two
business days after receipt of the redemption request. See "Purchase of
Shares--Dreyfus TeleTransfer Privilege."
Stock Certificates; Signatures. Any certificates representing Fund
shares to be redeemed must be submitted with the redemption request.
Written redemption requests must be signed by each shareholder, including
each holder of a joint account, and each signature must be guaranteed.
Signatures on endorsed certificates submitted for redemption also must be
guaranteed. The Transfer Agent has adopted standards and procedures
pursuant to which signature-guarantees in proper form generally will be
accepted from domestic banks, brokers, dealers, credit unions, national
securities exchanges, registered securities associations, clearing agencies
and savings associations, as well as from participants in the New York
Stock Exchange Medallion Program, the Securities Transfer Agents Medallion
Program ("STAMP"), and the Stock Exchanges Medallion Program. Guarantees
must be signed by an authorized signatory of the guarantor and
"Signature-Guaranteed" must appear with the signature. The Transfer Agent
may request additional documentation from corporations, executors,
administrators, trustees or guardians, and may accept other suitable
verification arrangements from foreign investors, such as consular
verification. For more information with respect to signature-guarantees,
please call the telephone number listed on the cover.
Redemption Commitment. The Fund has committed itself to pay in cash
all redemption requests by any shareholder of record, limited in amount
during any 90-day period to the lesser of $250,000 or 1% of the value of
the Fund's net assets at the beginning of such period. Such commitment is
irrevocable without the prior approval of the Securities and Exchange
Commission. In the case of requests for redemption in excess of such
amount, the Board reserves the right to make payments in whole or in part
in securities or other assets in case of an emergency or any time a cash
distribution would impair the liquidity of the Fund to the detriment of the
existing shareholders. In such event, the securities would be valued in
the same manner as the portfolio of the Fund is valued. If the recipient
sold such securities, brokerage charges would be incurred.
Suspension of Redemptions. The right of redemption may be suspended
or the date of payment postponed (a) during any period when the New York
Stock Exchange is closed (other than customary weekend and holiday
closings), (b) when trading in the markets the Fund ordinarily utilizes is
restricted, or when an emergency exists as determined by the Securities and
Exchange Commission so that disposal of the Fund's investments or
determination of its net asset value is not reasonably practicable, or (c)
for such other periods as the Securities and Exchange Commission by order
may permit to protect the Fund's shareholders.
SHAREHOLDER SERVICES
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "Shareholder
Services."
Fund Exchanges. Shares of other funds purchased by exchange will be
purchased on the basis of relative net asset value per share as follows:
A. Exchanges for shares of funds that are offered without a sales
load will be made without a sales load.
B. Shares of funds purchased without a sales load may be exchanged
for shares of other funds sold with a sales load, and the
applicable sales load will be deducted.
C. Shares of funds purchased with a sales load may be exchanged
without a sales load for shares of other funds sold without a
sales load.
D. Shares of funds purchased with a sales load, shares of funds
acquired by a previous exchange from shares purchased with a sales
load and additional shares acquired through reinvestment of
dividends or distributions of any such funds (collectively
referred to herein as "Purchased Shares") may be exchanged for
shares of other funds sold with a sales load (referred to herein
as "Offered Shares"), provided that, if the sales load applicable
to the Offered Shares exceeds the maximum sales load that could
have been imposed in connection with the Purchased Shares (at the
time the Purchased Shares were acquired), without giving effect to
any reduced loads, the difference will be deducted.
To accomplish an exchange under item D above, shareholders must notify
the Transfer Agent of their prior ownership of fund shares and their
account number.
To request an exchange, an investor, or the investor's Service Agent
acting on the investor's behalf, must give exchange instructions to the
Transfer Agent in writing or by telephone. The ability to issue exchange
instructions by telephone is given to all Fund shareholders automatically,
unless the investor checks the applicable "No" box on the Account
Application, indicating that the investor specifically refuses this
privilege. By using the Telephone Exchange Privilege, the investor
authorizes the Transfer Agent to act on telephonic instructions from any
person representing himself or herself to be the investor or a
representative of the investor's Service Agent, and reasonably believed by
the Transfer Agent to be genuine. Telephone exchanges may be subject to
limitations as to the amount involved or the number of telephone exchanges
permitted. Shares issued in certificate form are not eligible for
telephone exchange.
To establish a personal retirement plan by exchange, shares of the
fund being exchanged must have a value of at least the minimum initial
investment required for the fund into which the exchange is being made.
For Dreyfus-sponsored Keogh Plans, IRAs and IRAs set up under a Simplified
Employee Pension ("SEP-IRAs") with only one participant, the minimum
initial investment is $750. To exchange shares held in corporate plans,
403(b)(7) Plans and SEP-IRAs with more than one participant, the minimum
initial investment is $100 if the plan has at least $2,500 invested among
the funds in the Dreyfus Family of Funds. To exchange shares held in
personal retirement plans, the shares exchanged must have a current value
of at least $100.
Dreyfus Auto-Exchange Privilege. Dreyfus Auto-Exchange Privilege
permits an investor to purchase, in exchange for shares of the Fund, shares
of another fund in the Dreyfus Family of Funds. This Privilege is
available only for existing accounts. Shares will be exchanged on the
basis of relative net asset value as described above under "Fund
Exchanges." Enrollment in or modification or cancellation of this
Privilege is effective three business days following notification by the
investor. An investor will be notified if his account falls below the
amount designated to be exchanged under this Privilege. In this case, an
investor's account will fall to zero unless additional investments are made
in excess of the designated amount prior to the next Auto-Exchange
transaction. Shares held under IRA and other retirement plans are eligible
for this Privilege. Exchanges of IRA shares may be made between IRA
accounts and from regular accounts to the IRA accounts, but not from IRA
accounts to regular accounts. With respect to all other retirement
accounts, exchanges may be made only among those accounts.
Fund Exchanges and the Dreyfus Auto-Exchange Privilege are available
to shareholders resident in any state in which shares of the fund being
acquired may legally be sold. Shares may be exchanged only between
accounts having identical names and other identifying designations.
Shareholder Services Forms and prospectuses of the other funds may be
obtained by calling 1-800-645-6561. The Fund reserves the right to reject
any exchange request in whole or in part. The Fund Exchanges service or
Dreyfus Auto-Exchange Privilege may be modified or terminated at any time
upon notice to shareholders.
Automatic Withdrawal Plan. The Automatic Withdrawal Plan permits an
investor with a $5,000 minimum account to request withdrawal of a specified
dollar amount (minimum of $50) on either a monthly or quarterly basis.
Withdrawal payments are the proceeds from sales of Fund shares, not the
yield on the shares. If withdrawal payments exceed reinvested dividends
and distributions, the investor's shares will be reduced and eventually may
be depleted. There is a service charge of $.50 for each withdrawal check.
Automatic Withdrawal may be terminated at any time by the investor, the
Fund or the Transfer Agent. Shares for which certificates have been issued
may not be redeemed through the Automatic Withdrawal Plan.
Dreyfus Dividend Sweep. Dreyfus Dividend Sweep allows investors to
invest on the payment date their dividends or dividends and capital gain
distributions, if any, from the Fund in shares of another fund in the
Dreyfus Family of Funds of which the investor is a shareholder. Shares of
other funds purchased pursuant to this privilege will be purchased on the
basis of relative net asset value per share as follows:
A. Dividends and distributions paid by a fund may be invested without
imposition of a sales load in shares of other funds that are
offered without a sales load.
B. Dividends and distributions paid by a fund which does not charge a
sales load may be invested in shares of other funds sold with a
sales load, and the applicable sales load will be deducted.
C. Dividends and distributions paid by a fund which charges a sales
load may be invested in shares of other funds sold with a sales
load (referred to herein as "Offered Shares"), provided that, if
the sales load applicable to the Offered Shares exceeds the
maximum sales load charged by the fund from which dividends or
distributions are being swept, without giving effect to any
reduced loads, the difference will be deducted.
D. Dividend and distributions paid by a fund may be invested in
shares of other funds that impose a contingent deferred sales
charge ("CDSC") and the applicable CDSC, if any, will be imposed
upon redemption of such shares.
DETERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "How to Buy
Shares."
Valuation of Portfolio Securities. The Fund's investments are valued
by an independent pricing service (the "Service") approved by the Board.
When, in the judgment of the Service, quoted bid prices for investments are
readily available and are representative of the bid side of the market,
these investments are valued at the mean between the quoted bid prices (as
obtained by the Service from dealers in such securities) and asked prices
(as calculated by the Service based upon its evaluation of the market for
such securities). Other investments (which constitute a majority of the
portfolio securities) are carried at fair value as determined by the
Service, based on methods which include consideration of: yields or prices
of municipal bonds of comparable quality, coupon, maturity and type;
indications as to values from dealers; and general market conditions. The
Service may employ electronic data processing techniques and/or a matrix
system to determine valuations. The Service's procedures are reviewed by
the Fund's officers under the general supervision of the Board. Expenses
and fees, including the management fee (reduced by the expense limitation,
if any) and fees pursuant to the Shareholder Services Plan, are accrued
daily and are taken into account for the purpose of determining the net
asset value of Fund shares.
New York Stock Exchange Closings. The holidays (as observed) on which
the New York Stock Exchange is closed currently are: New Year's Day,
Presidents' Day, Good Friday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day,
Thanksgiving and Christmas.
PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS
Portfolio securities ordinarily are purchased from and sold to parties
acting as either principal or agent. Newly-issued securities ordinarily
are purchased directly from the issuer or from an underwriter; other
purchases and sales usually are placed with those dealers from which it
appears that the best price or execution will be obtained. Usually no
brokerage commissions, as such, are paid by the Fund for such purchases and
sales, although the price paid usually includes an undisclosed compensation
to the dealer acting as agent. The prices paid to underwriters of
newly-issued securities usually include a concession paid by the issuer to
the underwriter, and purchases of after-market securities from dealers
ordinarily are executed at a price between the bid and asked price. No
brokerage commissions have been paid by the Fund to date.
Transactions are allocated to various dealers by the Fund's portfolio
managers in their best judgment. The primary consideration is prompt and
effective execution of orders at the most favorable price. Subject to that
primary consideration, dealers may be selected for research, statistical or
other services to enable the Manager to supplement its own research and
analysis with the views and information of other securities firms.
Research services furnished by brokers through which the Fund effects
securities transactions may be used by the Manager in advising other funds
it advises and, conversely, research services furnished to the Manager by
brokers in connection with other funds the Manager advises may be used by
the Manager in advising the Fund. Although it is not possible to place a
dollar value on these services, it is the opinion of the Manager that the
receipt and study of such services should not reduce the overall expenses
of its research department.
The Fund's portfolio turnover rate for the fiscal years ended
September 30, 1994 and 1995 was 29.74% and 83.31% respectively. The Fund
anticipates that its annual portfolio turnover rate generally will not
exceed 100%, but the turnover rate will not be a limiting factor when the
Fund deems it desirable to sell or purchase securities. Therefore,
depending upon market conditions, the Fund's annual portfolio turnover rate
may exceed 100% in particular years.
DIVIDENDS, DISTRIBUTIONS AND TAXES
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "Dividends,
Distributions and Taxes."
Management believes that the Fund has qualified as a "regulated
investment company" under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended
(the "Code"), for the fiscal year ended September 30, 1995 and the Fund
intends to continue to so qualify, if such qualification is in the best
interests of its shareholders. As a regulated investment company, the Fund
will pay no Federal income tax on net investment income and net realized
capital gains to the extent that such income and gains are distributed to
shareholders in accordance with applicable provisions of the Code. The
term "regulated investment company" does not imply the supervision of
management or investment practices or policies by any government agency.
If, at the close of each quarter of its taxable year, at least 50% of
the value of the Fund's total assets consists of Federal tax exempt
obligations, then the Fund may designate and pay Federal exempt-interest
dividends from interest earned on all such tax exempt obligations. Such
exempt-interest dividends may be excluded by shareholders of the Fund from
their gross income for Federal income tax purposes. Dividends derived from
taxable investments, together with distributions from any net realized
short-term securities gains, generally are taxable as ordinary income for
Federal income tax purposes whether or not reinvested. Distributions from
net realized long-term securities gains generally are taxable as long-term
capital gains to a shareholder who is a citizen or resident of the United
States, whether or not reinvested and regardless of the length of time the
shareholder has held his shares.
If, at the close of each quarter of its taxable year, at least 50% of
the value of the Fund's total assets consists of obligations which, when
held by an individual, the interest therefrom is exempt from California
personal income tax, and if the Fund qualifies as a management company
under the California Revenue and Taxation Code, the Fund will be qualified
to pay dividends to its shareholders that are exempt from California
personal income tax (but not from California franchise tax) ("California
exempt-interest dividends"). However, the total amount of California
exempt-interest dividends paid by the Fund to a non-corporate shareholder
with respect to any taxable year cannot exceed such shareholder's pro rata
share of interest received by the Fund during such year that is exempt from
California taxation less any expenses and expenditures deemed to have been
paid from such interest.
For shareholders subject to the California personal income tax,
exempt-interest dividends derived from California Municipal Obligations
will not be subject to the California personal income tax. Distributions
from net realized short-term capital gains to California resident
shareholders will be subject to the California personal income tax as
ordinary income. Distributions from net realized long-term capital gains
may constitute long-term capital gains for individual California resident
shareholders. Unlike under Federal tax law, the Fund's shareholders will
not be subject to California personal income tax, or receive a credit for
California taxes paid by the Fund, on undistributed capital gains. In
addition, California tax law does not consider any portion of the
exempt-interest dividends paid an item of tax preference for the purposes
of computing the California alternative minimum tax.
Any dividend or distribution paid shortly after an investor's purchase
may have the effect of reducing the net asset value of his shares below the
cost of his investment. Such a distribution would be a return on the
investment in an economic sense although taxable as stated in "Dividends,
Distributions and Taxes" in the Prospectus. In addition, the Code provides
that if a shareholder has not held his Fund shares for more than six months
(or such shorter period as the Internal Revenue Service may prescribe by
regulation) and has received an exempt-interest dividend with respect to
such shares, any loss incurred on the sale of such shares will be
disallowed to the extent of the exempt-interest dividend received.
Ordinarily, gains and losses realized from portfolio transactions will
be treated as capital gain or loss. However, all or a portion of any gains
realized from the sale or other disposition of certain market discount
bonds will be treated as ordinary income under Section 1276 of the Code.
In addition, all or a portion of the gain realized from engaging in
"conversion transactions" may be treated as ordinary income under Section
1258 of the Code. "Conversion transactions" are defined to include certain
forward, futures, option and "straddle" transactions, transactions marketed
or sold to produce capital gains, or transactions described in Treasury
regulations to be issued in the future.
Under Section 1256 of the Code, gain or loss the Fund realizes from
certain futures and options transactions will be treated as 60% long-term
capital gain or loss and 40% short-term capital gain or loss. Gain or loss
will arise upon exercise or lapse of such futures and options as well as
from closing transactions. In addition, such futures or options remaining
unexercised at the end of the Fund's taxable year will be treated as sold
for their then fair market value, resulting in additional gain or loss to
the Fund characterized in the manner described above.
Offsetting positions held by the Fund involving certain futures and
options transactions may constitute "straddles." "Straddles" are defined
to include "offsetting positions" in actively traded personal property.
The tax treatment of "straddles" is governed by Sections 1092 and 1258 of
the Code, which, in certain circumstances, overrides or modifies the
provisions of Section 1256 of the Code. As such, all or a portion of any
short or long-term capital gain from certain "straddle" transactions may be
recharacterized to ordinary income.
If the Fund were treated as entering into "straddles" by reason of its
engaging in certain futures or options transactions, such "straddles" would
be characterized as "mixed straddles" if the futures or options
transactions comprising a part of such "straddles" were governed by Section
1256 of the Code. The Fund may make one or more elections with respect to
"mixed straddles." Depending on which election is made, if any, the
results to the Fund may differ. If no election is made to the extent the
"straddle" rules apply to positions established by the Fund, losses
realized by the Fund will be deferred to the extent of unrealized gain in
the offsetting position. Moreover, as a result of the "straddle" and
conversion transaction rules, short-term capital losses on "straddle"
positions may be recharacterized as long-term capital losses, and long-term
capital gains may be treated as short-term capital gains.
Investment by the Fund in securities issued at a discount or providing
for deferred interest or for payment of interest in the form of additional
obligations could, under special tax rules, affect the amount, timing and
character of distributions to shareholders. For example, the Fund could be
required to take into account annually a portion of the discount (or deemed
discount) at which such securities were issued and to distribute such
portion in order to maintain its qualification as a regulated investment
company. In such case, the Fund may have to dispose of securities which it
might otherwise have continued to hold in order to generate cash to satisfy
these distribution requirements.
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "Performance
Information."
The Fund's current yield for the 30-day period ended September 30,
1995 was 5.17%. Current yield is computed pursuant to a formula which
operates as follows: the amount of the Fund's expenses accrued for the
30-day period (net of reimbursements) is subtracted from the amount of the
dividends and interest earned (computed in accordance with regulatory
requirements) by the Fund during the period. That result is then divided
by the product of: (a) the average daily number of shares outstanding
during the period that were entitled to receive dividends, and (b) the net
asset value per share on the last day of the period less any undistributed
earned income per share reasonably expected to be declared as a dividend
shortly thereafter. The quotient is then added to 1, and that sum is
raised to the 6th power, after which 1 is subtracted. The current yield is
then arrived at by multiplying the result by 2.
Based upon a combined 1995 Federal and State of California effective
tax rate of 46.24%, the Fund's tax equivalent yield for the 30-day period
ended September 30, 1995 was 9.62%. Tax equivalent yield is computed by
dividing that portion of the current yield (calculated as described above)
which is tax exempt by 1 minus a stated tax rate and adding the quotient to
that portion, if any, of the yield of the Fund that is not tax exempt.
The tax equivalent yield noted above represents the application of the
highest Federal and State of California marginal personal income tax rates
presently in effect. For Federal personal income tax purposes, a 39.60%
tax rate has been used. For California personal income tax purposes, an
11.00% tax rate has been used. The tax equivalent figure, however, does
not include the potential effect of any local (including, but not limited
to, county, district or city) taxes, including applicable surcharges. In
addition, there may be pending legislation which could affect such stated
tax rates or yields. Each investor should consult its tax adviser, and
consider its own factual circumstances and applicable tax laws, in order to
ascertain the relevant tax equivalent yield.
The Fund's average annual total return for the 1, 5 and 5.975 year
periods ended September 30, 1995 was 9.82%, 8.18% and 8.00%, respectively.
Average annual total return is calculated by determining the ending
redeemable value of an investment purchased with a hypothetical $1,000
payment made at the beginning of the period (assuming the reinvestment of
dividends and distributions), dividing by the amount of the initial
investment, taking the "n"th root of the quotient (where "n" is the number
of years in the period) and subtracting 1 from the result.
The Fund's total return for the period October 10, 1989 (commencement
of operations) to September 30, 1995 was 58.34%. Total return is
calculated by subtracting the amount of the Fund's net asset value per
share at the beginning of a stated period from the net asset value per
share at the end of the period (after giving effect to the reinvestment of
dividends and distributions during the period), and dividing the result by
the net asset value per share at the beginning of the period.
From time to time, the Fund may use hypothetical tax equivalent yields
or charts in its advertising. These hypothetical yields or charts will be
used for illustrative purposes only and not as representative of the Fund's
past or future performance.
From time to time, advertising materials for the Fund may refer to or
discuss then-current or past economic conditions, developments and/or
events, including those relating to or arising from actual or proposed tax
legislation, statistical or other information relating to investment
companies, as compiled by industry associations such as the Investment
Company Institute, and Morningstar ratings and related analysis supporting
the rating.
INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUND
The following information supplements and should be read in
conjunction with the section in the Fund's Prospectus entitled "General
Information."
Each Fund share has one vote and, when issued and paid for in
accordance with the terms of the offering, is fully paid and
non-assessable. Fund shares are of one class and have equal rights as to
dividends and liquidation. Shares have no preemptive, subscription or
conversion rights and are freely transferable.
The Fund sends annual and semi-annual financial statements to all its
shareholders.
TRANSFER AND DIVIDEND DISBURSING AGENT, CUSTODIAN, COUNSEL,
AND INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
Dreyfus Transfer, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, P.O.
Box 9671, Providence, Rhode Island, 02940-9671, is the Fund's transfer and
dividend disbursing agent. Under a transfer agency agreement with the
Fund, the Transfer Agent arranges for the maintenance of shareholder
account records for the Fund, the handling of certain communications
between shareholders and the Fund and the payment of dividends and
distributions payable by the Fund. For these services, the Transfer Agent
receives a monthly fee computed on the basis of the number of shareholder
accounts it maintains for the Fund during the month, and is reimbursed for
certain out-of-pocket expenses. The Bank of New York, 90 Washington
Street, New York, New York 10286, is the Fund's custodian. Neither the
Transfer Agent nor The Bank of New York has any part in determining the
investment policies of the Fund or which securities are to be purchased or
sold by the Fund.
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, 7 Hanover Square, New York, New York
10004-2696, as counsel for the Fund, has rendered its opinion as to certain
legal matters regarding the due authorization and valid issuance of the
shares being sold pursuant to the Fund's Prospectus.
Ernst & Young LLP, 787 Seventh Avenue, New York, New York 10019,
independent auditors, have been selected as auditors of the Fund.
APPENDIX A
Certain California (the "State") constitutional amendments,
legislative measures, executive orders, civil actions and voter
initiatives, as well as the general financial condition of the State, could
adversely affect the ability of issuers of California Municipal Obligations
to pay interest and principal on such obligations. The following
information constitutes only a brief summary, does not purport to be a
complete description, and is based on information drawn from official
statements relating to securities offerings of the State of California and
various local agencies, available as of the date of this Statement of
Additional Information. While the Fund has not independently verified such
information, it has no reason to believe that such information is not
correct in all material respects.
Recent Developments. From mid-1990 to late 1993, the State suffered a
recession with the worst economic, fiscal and budget conditions since the
1930s. Construction, manufacturing (especially aerospace), exports and
financial services, among others, were all severely affected. Job losses
have been the worst of any post-war recession. Unemployment reached 10.1%
in January 1994, but fell sharply to 7.7% in October and November 1994.
According to the State's Department of Finance, recovery from the recession
in California began in 1994.
The recession seriously affected State tax revenues, which basically
mirror economic conditions. It also has caused increased expenditures for
health and welfare programs. The State also has been facing a structural
imbalance in its budget with the largest programs supported by the General
Fund (K-12 schools and community colleges, health and welfare, and
corrections) growing at rates higher than the growth rates for the
principal revenue sources of the General Fund. As a result, the State
experienced recurring budget deficits in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The State Controller reported that expenditures exceeded revenues for four
of the five fiscal years ending with 1991-92. The State had an operating
surplus of approximately $109 million in 1992-93 and $836 million in 1993-
94. However, at June 30, 1994, according to the Department of Finance, the
State's Special Fund for Economic Uncertainties ("SFEU") still had a
deficit, on a budget basis, of approximately $1.8 billion.
The accumulated budget deficits over the past several years, together
with expenditures for school funding which have not been reflected in the
budget, and reduction of available internal borrowable funds, have combined
to significantly deplete the State's cash resources to pay its ongoing
expenses. In order to meet its cash needs, the State has had to rely for
several years on a series of external borrowings, including borrowings past
the end of a fiscal year. Such borrowings are expected to continue in
future fiscal years. To meet its cash flow needs in the 1994-95 fiscal
year the State issued, in July and August 1994, $4.0 billion of revenue
anticipation warrants which mature on April 25, 1996, and $3.0 billion of
revenue anticipation notes which matured on June 28, 1995.
As a result of the deterioration in the State's budget and cash
situation, the rating agencies reduced the State's credit ratings. Between
October 1991 and July 1994, the rating on the State's general obligation
bonds was reduced by S&P from "AAA" to "A," by Moody's from "Aaa" to "A1"
and by Fitch from "AAA" to "A."
The 1994-95 Fiscal Year Budget (as updated in the January 10, 1995
Governor's Budget) projected $42.4 billion of General Fund revenues and
transfers and $41.7 billion of budgeted expenditures. In addition, the
1994-95 Budget Act anticipated deferring retirement of about $1 billion of
the accumulated budget deficit to the 1995-96 fiscal year when it is
intended to be fully retired by June 30, 1996.
The Governor's Budget for 1995-96 proposed General Fund revenues and
transfers of $42.5 billion and expenditures of $41.7 billion, which would
leave a balance of approximately $92 million in the budget reserve, the
SFEU, at June 30, 1996 after repayment of the accumulated budget deficits.
The Budget proposal was based on a number of assumptions, including receipt
of $830 million from the Federal government to offset costs of undocumented
and refugee immigrants.
On December 6, 1994, Orange County, California (the "County"),
together with its pooled investment funds (the "County Funds") filed for
protection under Chapter 9 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code, after reports
that the County Funds had suffered significant market losses in their
investments, causing a liquidity crisis for the County Funds and the
County. More than 180 other public entities, most of which, but not all,
are located in the County, were also depositors in the County Funds. As of
mid-January 1995, following a restructuring of most of the County Funds'
assets to increase their liquidity and reduce their exposure to interest
rate increases, the County estimated the County Funds' loss at about $1.69
billion, or about 23% of their initial deposits of approximately $7.5
billion. Many of the entities which deposited monies in the County Funds,
including the County, are facing cash flow difficulties because of the
bankruptcy filing and may be required to reduce programs or capital
projects. This also may effect their ability to meet their outstanding
obligations.
The State has no existing obligation with respect to any outstanding
obligations or securities of the County or any of the other participating
entities. However, in the event the County is unable to maintain county
administered State programs because of insufficient resources, it may be
necessary for the State to intervene, but the State cannot presently
predict what, if any, action may occur.
On January 17, 1994, an earthquake of the magnitude of an estimated
6.8 on the Richter Scale struck Los Angeles causing significant damage to
public and private structures and facilities. Although some individuals
and businesses suffered losses totaling in the billions of dollars, the
overall effect of the earthquake on the regional and State economy is not
expected to be serious.
State Finances. State moneys are segregated into the General Fund and
approximately 600 Special Funds. The General Fund consists of the revenues
received into the State Treasury and earnings from State investments, which
are not required by law to be credited to any other fund. The General Fund
is the principal operating fund for the majority of governmental activities
and is the depository of most major State revenue sources.
The SFEU is funded with General Fund revenues and was established to
protect the State from unforeseen reduced levels of revenues and/or
unanticipated expenditure increases. Amounts in the SFEU may be
transferred by the Controller as necessary to meet cash needs of the
General Fund. The Controller is required to return moneys so transferred
without payment of interest as soon as there are sufficient moneys in the
General Fund. For budgeting and accounting purposes, any appropriation
made from the SFEU is deemed an appropriation from the General Fund. For
year-end reporting purposes, the Controller is required to add the balance
in the SFEU to the balance in the General Fund so as to show the total
monies then available for General Fund purposes.
Inter-fund borrowing has been used for many years to meet temporary
imbalances of receipts and disbursements in the General Fund. As of June
30, 1994, the General Fund had outstanding loans in the aggregate principal
amount of $43 million to the General Fund from the SFEU and outstanding
loans in the aggregate principal amount of $5.2 billion, which consisted of
$4.0 billion of internal loans to the General Fund from the SFEU and other
Special Funds and $1.2 billion of external loans represented by the 1994
revenue anticipation warrants.
Articles XIIIA and XIIIB to the State Constitution and Other Revenue
Law Changes. Prior to 1977, revenues of the State government experienced
significant growth primarily as a result of inflation and continuous
expansion of the tax base of the State. In 1978, State voters approved an
amendment to the State Constitution known as Proposition 13, which added
Article XIIIA to the State Constitution, reducing ad valorem local property
taxes by more than 50%. In addition, Article XIIIA provides that
additional taxes may be levied by cities, counties and special districts
only upon approval of not less than a two-thirds vote of the "qualified
electors" of such district, and requires not less than a two-thirds vote of
each of the two houses of the State Legislature to enact any changes in
State taxes for the purpose of increasing revenues, whether by increased
rate or changes in methods of computation.
Primarily as a result of the reductions in local property tax revenues
received by local governments following the passage of Proposition 13, the
Legislature undertook to provide assistance to such governments by
substantially increasing expenditures from the General Fund for that
purpose beginning in the 1978-79 fiscal year. In recent years, in addition
to such increased expenditures, the indexing of personal income tax rates
(to adjust such rates for the effects of inflation), the elimination of
certain inheritance and gift taxes and the increase of exemption levels for
certain other such taxes had a moderating impact on the growth in State
revenues. In addition, the State has increased expenditures by providing a
variety of tax credits, including renters' and senior citizens' credits and
energy credits.
The State is subject to an annual "appropriations limit" imposed by
Article XIIIB of the State Constitution adopted in 1979. Article XIIIB
prohibits the State from spending "appropriations subject to limitation" in
excess of the appropriations limit imposed. "Appropriations subject to
limitations" are authorizations to spend "proceeds of taxes," which consist
of tax revenues, and certain other funds, including proceeds from
regulatory licenses, user charges or other fees to the extent that such
proceeds exceed "the cost reasonably borne by such entity in providing the
regulation, product or service." One of the exclusions from these
limitations is "debt service" (defined as "appropriations required to pay
the cost of interest and redemption charges, including the funding of any
reserve or sinking fund required in connection therewith, on indebtedness
existing or legally authorized as of January 1, 1979 or on bonded
indebtedness thereafter approved" by the voters). In addition,
appropriations required to comply with mandates of courts or the Federal
government and, pursuant to Proposition 111 enacted in June 1990,
appropriations for qualified capital outlay projects and appropriations of
revenues derived from any increase in gasoline taxes and motor vehicle
weight fees above January 1, 1990 levels are not included as appropriations
subject to limitation. In addition, a number of recent initiatives were
structured or proposed to create new tax revenues dedicated to certain
specific uses, with such new taxes expressly exempted from the Article
XIIIB limits (e.g., increased cigarette and tobacco taxes enacted by
Proposition 99 in 1988). The appropriations limit also may be exceeded in
cases of emergency. However, unless the emergency arises from civil
disturbance or natural disaster declared by the Governor, and the
appropriations are approved by two-thirds of the Legislature, the
appropriations limit for the next three years must be reduced by the amount
of the excess.
The State's appropriations limit in each year is based on the limit
for the prior year, adjusted annually for changes in California per capita
personal income and changes in population, and adjusted, when applicable,
for any transfer of financial responsibility of providing services to or
from another unit of government. The measurement of change in population
is a blended average of statewide overall population growth, and change in
attendance at local school and community college ("K-14") districts. As
amended by Proposition 111, the appropriations limit is tested over
consecutive two-year periods. Any excess of the aggregate "proceeds of
taxes" received over such two-year periods above the combined
appropriations limits for those two years is divided equally between
transfers to K-14 districts and refunds to taxpayers.
As originally enacted in 1979, the State's appropriations limit was
based on its 1978-79 fiscal year authorizations to expend proceeds of taxes
and was adjusted annually to reflect changes in cost of living and
population (using different definitions, which were modified by Proposition
111). Commencing with the 1991-92 fiscal year, the State's appropriations
limit is adjusted annually based on the actual 1986-87 limit, and as if
Proposition 111 had been in effect. The State Legislature has enacted
legislation to implement Article XIIIB which defines certain terms used in
Article XIIIB and sets forth the methods for determining the State's
appropriations limit. Government Code Section 7912 requires an estimate of
the State's appropriations limit to be included in the Governor's Budget,
and thereafter to be subject to the budget process and established in the
Budget Act.
For the 1990-91 fiscal year, the State appropriations limit was $32.7
billion, and appropriations subject to limitation were $7.51 billion under
the limit. The limit for the 1991-92 fiscal year was $34.2 billion, and
appropriations subject to limitations were $3.8 billion under the limit.
The limit for the 1992-93 fiscal year was $35.01 billion, and the
appropriations subject to limitation were $7.53 billion under the limit.
The limit for the 1993-94 fiscal year was $36.060 billion, and the
appropriations subject to limitation were $6.55 billion under the limit.
The estimated limit for the 1994-95 fiscal year was $37.55 billion, and the
appropriations subject to limitations were estimated to be $6.05 billion
under the limit.
In November 1988, State voters approved Proposition 98, which changed
State funding of public education below the university level and the
operation of the State's appropriations limit, primarily by guaranteeing K-
14 schools a minimum share of General Fund revenues. Under Proposition 98
(as modified by Proposition 111, which was enacted in June 1990), K-14
schools are guaranteed the greater of (a) 40.3% of General Fund revenues
("Test 1"), (b) the amount appropriated to K-14 schools in the prior year,
adjusted for changes in the cost of living (measured as in Article XIIIB by
reference to California per capita personal income) and enrollment ("Test
2"), or (c) a third test, which would replace the second test in any year
when the percentage growth in per capita General Fund revenues from the
prior year plus .5% is less than the percentage growth in California per
capita personal income ("Test 3"). Under "Test 3," schools would receive
the amount appropriated in the prior year adjusted for changes in
enrollment and per capita General Fund revenues, plus an additional small
adjustment factor. If "Test 3" is used in any year, the difference between
"Test 3" and "Test 2" would become a "credit" to schools which would be the
basis of payments in future years when per capita General Fund revenue
growth exceeds per capita personal income growth.
Proposition 98 permits the Legislature by two-thirds vote of both
houses, with the Governor's concurrence, to suspend the K-14 schools'
minimum funding formula for a one-year period. In the fall of 1989, the
Legislature and the Governor utilized this provision to avoid having 40.3%
of revenues generated by a special supplemental sales tax enacted for
earthquake relief go to K-14 schools. Proposition 98 also contains
provisions transferring certain State tax revenues in excess of the Article
XIIIB limit to K-14 schools.
The 1991-92 Budget Act, applying "Test 2" of Proposition 98,
appropriated approximately $18.5 billion for K-14 schools pursuant to
Proposition 98. During the course of the fiscal year, revenues proved to
be substantially below expectations. By the time the Governor's Budget was
introduced in January 1992, it became clear that per capita growth in
General Fund revenues for 1991-92 would be far smaller than the growth in
California per capita personal income and the Governor's Budget therefore
reflected a reduction in Proposition 98 funding in 1991-92 by applying
"Test 3" rather than "Test 2."
In response to the changing revenue situation and to fully fund the
Proposition 98 guarantee in both the 1991-92 and 1992-93 fiscal years
without exceeding it, the Legislature enacted several bills as part of the
1992-93 budget package which responded to the fiscal crisis in education
funding. Fiscal year 1991-92 Proposition 98 appropriations for K-14
schools were reduced by $1.083 billion. In order to not adversely impact
cash received by school districts, however, a short-term loan was
appropriated from the non-Proposition 98 State General Fund. The
Legislature then appropriated $16.6 billion to K-14 schools for 1992-93
(the minimum guaranteed by Proposition 98), but designated $1.083 billion
of this amount to "repay" the prior year loan, thereby reducing cash
outlays in 1992-93 by that amount. In addition to reducing the 1991-92
fiscal year appropriations for K-14 schools by $1.083 billion and
converting the amount to a loan (the "inter-year adjustment"), Chapter 703,
Statutes of 1992 also made an adjustment to "Test 1," based on the
additional $1.2 billion of local property taxes that were shifted to
schools and community colleges. The "Test 1" percentage changed from 40%
to 37%. Additionally, Chapter 703 contained a provision that if an
appellate court should determine that the "Test 1" recalculation or the
inter-year adjustment is unconstitutional, unenforceable or invalid,
Proposition 98 would be suspended for the 1992-93 fiscal year, with the
result that K-14 schools would receive the amount intended by the 1992-93
Budget Act compromise.
The State Controller stated in October 1992 that, because of a
drafting error in Chapter 703, he could not implement the $1.083 billion
reduction of the 1991-92 school funding appropriation, which was part of
the inter-year adjustment. The Legislature untimely enacted corrective
legislation as part of the 1993-94 Budget package to implement the $1.083
billion inter-year adjustment as originally intended.
In the 1992-93 Budget Act, a new loan of $732 million was made to K-12
schools in order to maintain per-average daily attendance ("ADA") funding
at the same level as 1991-92, at $4,187. An additional loan of $241
million was made to community college districts. These loans are to be
repaid from future Proposition 98 entitlements. (The teachers'
organization lawsuit discussed above also seeks to declare invalid the
provision making the $732 million a loan "repayable" from future years'
Proposition 98 funds. Including both State and local funds, and adjusting
for the loans and repayments, on a cash basis, total Proposition 98 K-12
funding in 1992-93 increased to $21.5 billion, 2.4% more than the amount in
1992-93 ($21.0 billion).
Based on revised State tax revenues and estimated decreased reported
pupil enrollment, the 1993-94 Budget Act projected that the 1992-93
Proposition 98 Budget Act appropriations of $16.6 billion exceeded a
revised minimum guarantee by $313 million. As a result, the 1993-94 Budget
Act reverted $25 million in 1992-93 appropriations to the General Fund.
Limiting the reversion to this amount ensures that per ADA funding for
general purposes will remain at the prior year level of $4,217 per pupil.
The 1993-94 Governor's Budget subsequently proposed deficiency funding of
$121 million for school apportionments and special education, increasing
funding per pupil in 1992-93 to $4,244. The 1993-94 Budget Act also
designated $98 million in 1992-93 appropriations toward satisfying prior
years' guarantee levels, an obligation that resulted primarily from
updating State tax revenues for 1991-92, and designates $190 million as a
loan repayable from 1993-94 funding.
The 1993-94 Budget Act projected the Proposition 98 minimum funding
level at $13.5 billion based on the "Test 3" calculation where the
guarantee is determined by the change in per capita growth in General Fund
revenues, which are projected to decrease on a year-over-year basis. This
amount also takes into account increased property taxes transferred to
school districts from other local governments.
Legislation accompanying the 1993-94 Budget Act (Chapter 66/93)
provided a new loan of $609 million to K-12 schools in order to maintain
per ADA funding at $4,217 and a loan of $178 million to community colleges.
These loans have been combined with the K-14 1992-93 loans into one loan
totalling $1.760 billion. Repayment of this loan would be from future
years' Proposition 98 entitlements, and would be conditioned on maintaining
current funding levels per pupil for K-12 schools. Chapter 66 also reduced
the "Test 1" percentage to 35% to reflect the property tax shift among
local government agencies.
The 1994-95 Budget Act appropriated $14.4 billion of Proposition 98
funds for K14 schools based on Test 2. This exceeded the minimum
Proposition 98 guarantee by $8 million to maintain K-12 funding per pupil
at $4,217. Based upon updated State revenues, growth rates and inflation
factors, the 1994-95 Budget Act appropriated an additional $286 million
within Proposition 98 for the 1993-94 fiscal year, to reflect a need in
appropriations for school districts and county offices of education, as
well as an anticipated deficiency in special education fundings. These and
other minor appropriation adjustments increased the 1993-94 Proposition 98
guarantee to $13.8 billion, which exceeded the minimum guarantee in that
year by $272 million and provided per pupil funding of $4,225.
The 1995-96 Governor's Budget adjusted the 1993-94 minimum guarantee
to reflect changes in enrollment and inflation, and 1993-94 Proposition 98
appropriations were increased to $14.1 billion, primarily to reflect
changes in the statutory continuous appropriation for apportionments. The
revised appropriations exceeded the minimum guarantee by $32 million. This
appropriation level still provided per-pupil funding of $4,225.
The 1994-95 Proposition 98 minimum guarantee also has been adjusted
for changes in factors described above, and was calculated to be $14.9
billion. Within the minimum guarantee, the dollars per pupil were
maintained at the prior year's level; consequently, the 1994-95 minimum
guarantee included a loan repayment of $135 million, and the per-pupil
funding increased to $4,231.
The 1995-96 Governor's Budget proposes to appropriate $15.9 billion of
Proposition 98 funds to K-14 to meet the guarantee level. Included within
the guarantee is a loan repayment of $379 million for the combined
outstanding loans of $1.76 billion. Funding per pupil is estimated to
increase by $61 over 1994-95 to $4,292.
Sources of Tax Revenue. The California personal income tax, which in
1992-93 contributed about 44% of General Fund revenues, is closely modeled
after the Federal income tax law. It is imposed on net taxable income
(gross income less exclusions and deductions). The tax is progressive with
rates ranging from 1% to 11%. Personal, dependent, and other credits are
allowed against the gross tax liability. In addition, taxpayers may be
subject to an alternative minimum tax ("AMT") which is much like the
Federal AMT. This is designed to ensure that excessive use of tax
preferences does not reduce taxpayers' liabilities below some minimum
level. Legislation enacted in July 1991 added two new marginal tax rates,
at 10% and 11%, effective for tax years 1991 through 1995. After 1995, the
maximum personal income tax rate is scheduled to return to 9.3%, and the
AMT rate is scheduled to drop from 8.5% to 7%.
The personal income tax is adjusted annually by the change in the
consumer price index to prevent taxpayers from being pushed into higher tax
brackets without a real increase in income.
The sales tax is imposed upon retailers for the privilege of selling
tangible personal property in California. Most retail sales and leases are
subject to the tax. However, exemptions have been provided for certain
essentials such as food for home consumption, prescription drugs, gas,
electricity and water. Sales tax accounted for about 38% of General Fund
revenue in 1992-93. Bank and corporation tax revenues comprised about 11%
of General Fund revenue in 1992-93. In 1989, Proposition 99 added a 25
cents per pack excise tax on cigarettes, and a new equivalent excise tax on
other tobacco products. Legislation enacted in 1993 added an additional 2
cents per pack for the purpose of funding breast cancer research.
General Financial Condition of the State. In the years following
enactment of the Federal Tax Reform Act of 1986, and conforming changes to
the State's tax laws, taxpayer behavior became more difficult to predict,
and the State experienced a series of fiscal years in which revenue came in
significantly higher or lower than original estimates. The 1989-90 fiscal
year ended with revenues below estimates and the SFEU was fully depleted by
June 30, 1990. This date essentially coincided with the date of the most
recent recession, and the State subsequently accumulated a budget deficit
in the SFEU approaching $2.8 billion at its peak. The State's budget
problems in recent years also have been caused by a structural imbalance
which has been identified by the current and previous Administrations. The
largest General Fund programs -- K-14 education, health, welfare and
corrections -- were increasing faster than the revenue base, driven by the
State's rapid population increases.
Starting in the 1990-91 fiscal year, each budget required multibillion
dollar actions to bring projected revenues and expenditures into balance
and to close large "budget gaps" which were identified. The Legislature
and Governor eventually agreed on significant cuts in program expenditures,
some transfers of program responsibilities and funding from the State to
local governments, revenue increases (particularly in the 1991-92 fiscal
year budget), and various one-time adjustments and accounting changes.
However, as the recession took hold and deepened after the summer of 1990,
revenues dropped sharply and expenditures for health and welfare programs
increased as job losses mounted, so that the State ended each of the 1990-
91 and 1991-92 fiscal years with an unanticipated deficit in the budget
reserve, the SFEU, as compared to projected positive balances.
As a result of the revenue shortfalls accumulating for the previous
two fiscal years, the Controller in April 1992 indicated that cash
resources (including borrowing from Special Funds) would not be sufficient
to meet all General Fund obligations due on June 30 and July 1, 1992. On
June 25, 1992, the Controller issued $475 million of 1992 Revenue
Anticipation Warrants (the "1992 Warrants") in order to provide funds to
cover all necessary payments from the General Fund at the end of the 1991-
92 fiscal year and on July 1, 1992. The 1992 Warrants were paid on July 24,
1992. In addition to the 1992 Warrants, the Controller reported that as of
June 30, 1992, the General Fund had borrowed $1.336 billion from the SFEU
and $4.699 billion from other Special Funds, using all but about $183
million of borrowable cash resources.
To balance the 1992-93 Governor's Budget, program reductions totalling
$4.365 billion and a revenue and transfer increase of $872 million were
proposed for the 1991-92 and 1992-93 fiscal years. Economic performance in
the State continued to be sluggish after the 1992-93 Governor's Budget was
prepared. By the time of the "May Revision," issued on May 20, 1992, the
Administration estimated that the 1992-93 Budget needed to address a gap of
about $7.9 billion, much of which was needed to repay the accumulated
budget deficits of the previous two years.
The severity of the budget actions needed led to a long delay in
adopting the budget. With the failure to enact a budget by July 1, 1992,
the State had no legal authority to pay many of its vendors until the
budget was passed. Starting on July 1, 1992, the Controller was required
to issue "registered warrants" in lieu of normal warrants backed by cash to
pay many State obligations. Available cash was used to pay
constitutionally mandated and priority obligations, such as debt service on
bonds and revenue anticipation warrants. Between July 1 and September 4,
1992, the Controller issued an aggregate of approximately $3.8 billion of
registered warrants payable from the General Fund, all of which were called
for redemption by September 4, 1992 following enactment of the 1992-93
Budget Act and issuance by the State of $3.3 billion of interim notes.
The Legislature enacted the 1992-93 Budget Bill on August 29, 1992,
and it was signed by the Governor on September 2, 1992. The 1992-93 Budget
Act provided for expenditures of $57.4 billion and consisted of General
Fund expenditures of $40.8 billion and Special Fund and Bond Fund
expenditures of $16.6 billion. The Department of Finance estimated a
balance in the SFEU of $28 million on June 30, 1993.
The $7.9 billion budget gap was closed primarily through cuts in the
program expenditures (principally for health and welfare programs, aid to
schools and support for higher education), together with some increases in
revenues from accelerated collections and changes in tax laws to confirm to
Federal law changes, and a variety of on-time inter-fund transfers and
deferrals. The other major component of the budget compromise was a law
requiring local governments to transfer a total of $1.3 billion to K-12
school and community college districts, thereby reducing by that amount
General Fund support for those districts under Proposition 98.
In May 1993, the Department of Finance projected that the General Fund
would end the fiscal year on June 30, 1993 with an accumulated budget
deficit of about $2.8 billion, and a negative fund balance of about $2.2
billion (the difference being certain reserves for encumbrances and school
funding costs). As a result, the State issued $5 billion of revenue
anticipation notes and warrants.
The Governor's 1993-94 Budget, introduced on January 8, 1993, proposed
General Fund expenditures of $37.3 billion, with projected revenues of
$39.9 billion. It also proposed Special Fund expenditures of $12.4 billion
and Special Fund revenues of $12.1 billion. The 1993-94 fiscal year
represented the third consecutive year the Governor and the Legislature
were faced with a very difficult budget environment, requiring revenue
actions and expenditure cuts totaling billions of dollars to produce a
balanced budget. To balance the budget in the face of declining revenues,
the Governor proposed a series of revenue shifts from local government,
reliance on increased Federal aid and reductions in state spending.
The "May Revision" of the Governor's Budget, released on May 20, 1993,
indicated that the revenue projections of the January Budget Proposal were
tracking well, with the full year 1992-93 about $80 million higher than the
January projection. Personal income tax revenue was higher than projected,
sales tax was close to target, and bank and corporation taxes were lagging
behind projections. The May Revision projected the State would have an
accumulated deficit of about $2.75 billion by June 30, 1993. The Governor
proposed to eliminate this deficit over an 18-month period. He also agreed
to retain the 0.5% sales tax scheduled to expire June 30 for a six-month
period, dedicated to local public safety purposes, with a November election
to determine a permanent extension. Unlike previous years, the Governor's
Budget and May Revision did not calculate a "gap" to be closed, but rather
set forth revenue and expenditure forecasts and proposals designed to
produce a balanced budget.
The 1993-94 Budget Act was signed by the Governor on June 30, 1993,
along with implementing legislation. The Governor vetoed about $71 million
in spending. With enactment of the Budget Act, the State carried out its
regular cash flow borrowing program for the fiscal year, which included the
issuance of approximately $2 billion of revenue anticipation notes that
matured on June 28, 1994.
The 1993-94 Budget Act was predicated on General Fund revenues and
transfers estimated at $40.6 billion, about $700 million higher than the
January Governor's Budget, but still about $400 million below 1992-93 (and
the second consecutive year of actual decline). The principal reasons for
declining revenues were the continued weak economy and the expiration (or
repeal) of three fiscal steps taken in 1991--a half cent temporary sales
tax, a deferral of operating loss carry forwards, and repeal by initiative
of a sales tax on candy and snack foods.
The 1993-94 Budget Act also assumed Special Fund revenues of $11.9
billion, an increase of 2.9% over 1992-93.
The 1993-94 Budget Act included General Fund expenditures of $38.5
billion (a 6.3% reduction from projected 1992-93 expenditures of $41.1
billion), in order to keep a balanced budget within the available revenues.
The Budget also included Special Fund expenditures of $12.1 billion, a 4.2%
increase.
The 1993-94 Budget Act contained no General Fund tax/revenue increases
other than a two year suspension of the renters' tax credit.
Administration reports during the course of the 1993-94 fiscal year
indicated that while economic recovery appeared to have started in the
second half of the fiscal year, recessionary conditions continued longer
than had been anticipated when the 1993-94 Budget Act was adopted.
Overall, revenues for the 1993-94 fiscal year were about $800 million lower
than original projections, and expenditures were about $780 million higher,
primarily because of higher health and welfare caseloads, lower property
taxes which require greater State support for K-14 education to make up to
shortfall, and lower than anticipated Federal government payments for
immigration-related costs. The reports in May and June 1994, indicated that
revenues in the second half of the 1993-94 fiscal year were very close to
the projections made in the Governor's Budget of January 10, 1994, which
was consistent with a slow turn around in the economy.
The Department of Finance's July 1994 Bulletin, which included final
June receipts, reported that June revenues were $114 million (2.5%) above
projection, with final end-of-year results at $377 million (about 1%) above
the May Revision projections. Part of this result was due to the end-of-
year adjustments and reconciliations. Personal income tax and sales tax
continued to track projections. The largest factor in the higher than
anticipated revenues was from bank and corporation taxes, which were $140
million (18.4%) above projection in June.
During the 1993-94 fiscal year, the State implemented the Deficit
Retirement Plan, which was part of the 1993-94 Budget Act, by issuing $1.2
billion of revenue anticipation warrants in February 1994 that matured
December 21, 1994. This borrowing reduced the cash deficit at the end of
the 1993-94 fiscal year. Nevertheless, because of the $1.5 billion
variance from the original 1993-94 Budget Act assumptions, the General Fund
ended the fiscal year at June 30, 1994 carrying forward an accumulated
deficit of approximately $1.8 billion.
Because of the revenue shortfall and the State's reduced internal
borrowable cash resources, in addition to the $1.2 billion of revenue
anticipation warrants issued as part of the Deficit Retirement Plan, the
State issued an additional $2.0 billion of revenue anticipation warrants
that matured July 26, 1994, which were needed to fund the State's
obligations and expenses through the end of the 1993-94 fiscal year.
The 1994-95 fiscal year represented the fourth consecutive year the
Governor and Legislature were faced with a very difficult budget
environment to produce a balanced budget. Many program cost and budgetary
adjustments had already been made in the last three years. The Governor's
Budget Proposal, as updated in May and June 1994 proposed a two-year
solution to pass the accumulated deficit. The budget proposal set forth
revenue and expenditure forecasts and revenue and expenditure proposals
which estimated operating surpluses for the budget for both 1994-95 and
1995-96, and lead to the elimination of the accumulated budget deficit,
estimated at about $1.8 billion at June 30, 1994, by June 30, 1996.
The 1994-95 Budget Act, signed by the Governor on July 8, 1994,
projected revenues and transfers of $41.9 billion, $2.1 billion higher than
revenues in 1993-94. This reflected the Administration's forecast of an
improving economy. Also included in this figure was the projected receipt
of about $360 million from the Federal government to reimburse the State's
cost of incarcerating undocumented immigrants, most of which eventually was
not received.
The 1994-95 Budget Act projected Special Fund revenues of $12.1
billion, a decrease of 2.4% from 1993-94 estimated revenues.
The 1994-95 Budget Act projected General Fund expenditures of $40.9
billion, an increase of $1.6 billion over the 1993-94 fiscal year. The
1994-95 Budget Act also projected Special Fund expenditures of $13.7
billion, a 5.4% increase over 1993-94 fiscal year estimated expenditures.
The 1994-95 Budget Act contained no tax increases. Under legislation
enacted for the 1993-94 Budget Act, the renters' tax credit was suspended
for two years (1993 and 1994). A ballot proposition to permanently restore
the renters' tax credit after 1995 failed at the June 1994 election. The
Legislature enacted a further one-year suspension of the renters' tax
credit, for 1995, saving about $390 million in the 1995-96 fiscal year.
The 1994-95 Budget Act assumed that the State would use a cash flow
borrowing program in 1994-95 which combines one-year notes and two-year
warrants, which were issued. Issuance of the warrants allows the State to
defer repayment of approximately $1.0 billion of its accumulated budget
deficit into the 1995-96 fiscal year. The Budget Adjustment Law enacted
along with the 1994-95 Budget Act is designed to ensure that the warrants
will be repaid in the 1995-96 fiscal year.
The Department of Finance Bulletin for April 1995 reported that
General Fund revenues for March 1995 were $28 million, or 1.1%, below
forecast, and that year-to-date General Fund revenues were $110 million, or
0.4%, below forecast.
Initial analysis of the Federal fiscal year 1995 budget by the
Department of Finance indicates that about $98 million was appropriated for
California to offset costs of incarceration of undocumented and refugee
immigrants, less than the $356 million which was assumed in the State's
1994-95 Budget Act.
For the first time in four years, the State enters the upcoming 1995-
96 fiscal year with strengthening revenues based on an improving economy.
On January 10, 1995, the Governor presented his 1995-96 Fiscal Year Budget
Proposal (the "Proposed Budget"). The Proposed Budget estimates General
Fund revenues and transfers of $42.5 billion (an increase of 0.2% over
1994-95). This nominal increase from 1994-95 fiscal year reflects the
Governor's realignment proposal and the first year of his tax cut proposal.
Without these two proposals, General Fund revenues would be projected at
approximately $43.8 billion, or an increase of 3.3% over 1994-95.
Expenditures are estimated at $41.7 billion (essentially unchanged from
1994-95). Special Fund revenues are estimated at $13.5 billion (10.7%
higher than 1994-95) and Special Fund expenditures are estimated at $13.8
billion (12.2% higher than 1994-95). The Proposed Budget projects that the
General Fund will end the fiscal year at June 30, 1996 with a budget
surplus in SFEU of about $92 million, or less than 1% of General Fund
expenditures, and will have repaid all of the accumulated budget deficits.
Recent Economic Trends. Revised employment data indicate that
California's recession ended in 1993, and following a period of stability,
a solid recovery is now underway. The State's unemployment rate fell
sharply last year, from 10.1% in January to 7.7% in October and November
1994. The gap between the national and California jobless rates narrowed
from 3.4 percentage points at the beginning of 1994 to an average of 2
percentage points in October and November. The number of unemployed
Californians fell by nearly 400,000 during the year, while civilian
employment increased more than 300,000 in 1994.
Other indicators, including retail sales, homebuilding activity,
existing home sales and bank lending volume all confirm the State's
recovery.
Personal income was severely affected by the Northridge Earthquake,
which reduced the first quarter 1994 figure by $22 billion at an annual
rate, reflecting the uninsured damage to residences and unincorporated
businesses. As a result, personal income growth for all of 1994 was about
4.2%. However, excluding the Northridge effects, growth would have been in
excess of 5%. Personal income is expected to grow 6.6% for 1995.
APPENDIX B
Description of S&P, Moody's and Fitch ratings:
S&P
Municipal Bond Ratings
An S&P municipal bond rating is a current assessment of the
creditworthiness of an obligor with respect to a specific obligation.
The ratings are based on current information furnished by the issuer
or obtained by S&P from other sources it considers reliable, and will
include: (1) likelihood of default-capacity and willingness of the obligor
as to the timely payment of interest and repayment of principal in
accordance with the terms of the obligation; (2) nature and provisions of
the obligation; and (3) protection afforded by, and relative position of,
the obligation in the event of bankruptcy, reorganization or other
arrangement under the laws of bankruptcy and other laws affecting
creditors' rights.
AAA
Debt rated AAA has the highest rating assigned by S&P. Capacity to
pay interest and repay principal is extremely strong.
AA
Debt rated AA has a very strong capacity to pay interest and repay
principal and differs from the highest rated issues only in a small degree.
A
Principal and interest payments on bonds in this category are regarded
as safe. This rating describes the third strongest capacity for payment of
debt service. It differs from the two higher ratings because:
General Obligation Bonds -- There is some weakness in the local
economic base, in debt burden, in the balance between revenues and
expenditures, or in quality of management. Under certain adverse
circumstances, any one such weakness might impair the ability of the issuer
to meet debt obligations at some future date.
Revenue Bonds -- Debt service coverage is good, but not exceptional.
Stability of the pledged revenues could show some variations because of
increased competition or economic influences on revenues. Basic security
provisions, while satisfactory, are less stringent. Management performance
appears adequate.
BBB
Of the investment grade, this is the lowest.
General Obligation Bonds -- Under certain adverse conditions, several
of the above factors could contribute to a lesser capacity for payment of
debt service. The difference between "A" and "BBB" rating is that the
latter shows more than one fundamental weakness, or one very substantial
fundamental weakness, whereas the former shows only one deficiency among
the factors considered.
Revenue Bonds -- Debt coverage is only fair. Stability of the pledged
revenues could show substantial variations with the revenue flow possibly
being subject to erosion over time. Basic security provisions are no more
than adequate. Management performance could be stronger.
BB, B, CCC, CC, C
Debt rated BB, B, CCC, CC or C is regarded as having predominantly
speculative characteristics with respect to capacity to pay interest and
repay principal. BB indicates the least degree of speculation and C the
highest degree of speculation. While such debt will likely have some
quality and protective characteristics, these are outweighed by large
uncertainties or major risk exposures to adverse conditions.
BB
Debt rated BB has less near-term vulnerability to default than other
speculative grade debt. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or
exposure to adverse business, financial or economic conditions which could
lead to inadequate capacity to meet timely interest and principal payments.
B
Debt rated B has a greater vulnerability to default but presently has
the capacity to meet interest payments and principal repayments. Adverse
business, financial or economic conditions would likely impair capacity or
willingness to pay interest and repay principal.
CCC
Debt rated CCC has a current identifiable vulnerability to default,
and is dependent upon favorable business, financial and economic conditions
to meet timely payments of principal. In the event of adverse business,
financial or economic conditions, it is not likely to have the capacity to
pay interest and repay principal.
CC
The rating CC is typically applied to debt subordinated to senior debt
which is assigned an actual or implied CCC rating.
C
The rating C is typically applied to debt subordinated to senior debt
which is assigned an actual or implied CCC- debt rating.
D
Bonds rated D are in default, and payment of interest and/or repayment
of principal is in arrears.
Plus (+) or minus (-): The ratings from AA to CCC may be modified by
the addition of a plus or minus sign to show relative standing within the
major ratings categories.
Municipal Note Ratings
SP-1
The issuers of these municipal notes exhibit very strong or strong
capacity to pay principal and interest. Those issues determined to possess
overwhelming safety characteristics are given a plus (+) designation.
SP-2
The issuers of these municipal notes exhibit satisfactory capacity to
pay principal and interest.
Commercial Paper Ratings
The designation A-1 by S&P indicates that the degree of safety
regarding timely payment is either overwhelming or very strong. Those
issues determined to possess overwhelming safety characteristics are
denoted with a plus sign (+) designation. Capacity for timely payment on
issues with an A-2 designation is strong. However, the relative degree of
safety is not as high as for issues designated A-1.
Moody's
Municipal Bond Ratings
Aaa
Bonds which are rated Aaa are judged to be of the best quality. They
carry the smallest degree of investment risk and are generally referred to
as "gilt edge." Interest payments are protected by a large or by an
exceptionally stable margin and principal is secure. While the various
protective elements are likely to change, such changes as can be visualized
are most unlikely to impair the fundamentally strong position of such
issues.
Aa
Bonds which are rated Aa are judged to be of high quality by all
standards. Together with the Aaa group they comprise what generally are
known as high-grade bonds. They are rated lower than the best bonds
because margins of protection may not be as large as in Aaa securities or
fluctuation of protective elements may be of greater amplitude or there may
be other elements present which make the long-term risks appear somewhat
larger than in Aaa securities.
A
Bonds which are rated A possess many favorable investment attributes
and are to be considered as upper medium-grade obligations. Factors giving
security to principal and interest are considered adequate, but elements
may be present which suggest a susceptibility to impairment some time in
the future.
Baa
Bonds which are rated Baa are considered as medium grade obligations,
i.e., they are neither highly protected nor poorly secured. Interest
payments and principal security appear adequate for the present but certain
protective elements may be lacking or may be characteristically unreliable
over any great length of time. Such bonds lack outstanding investment
characteristics and in fact have speculative characteristics as well.
Ba
Bonds which are rated Ba are judged to have speculative elements;
their future cannot be considered as well assured. Often the protection of
interest and principal payments may be very moderate, and therefore not
well safeguarded during both good and bad times over the future.
Uncertainty of position characterizes bonds in this class.
B
Bonds which are rated B generally lack characteristics of the
desirable investment. Assurance of interest and principal payments or of
maintenance of other terms of the contract over any long period of time may
be small.
Caa
Bonds which are rated Caa are of poor standing. Such issues may be in
default or there may be present elements of danger with respect to
principal or interest.
Ca
Bonds which are rated Ca present obligations which are speculative in
a high degree. Such issues are often in default or have other marked
shortcomings.
C
Bonds which are rated C are the lowest rated class of bonds, and
issues so rated can be regarded as having extremely poor prospects of ever
attaining any real investment standing.
Moody's applies the numerical modifiers 1, 2 and 3 to show relative
standing within the major rating categories, except in the Aaa category and
in the categories below B. The modifier 1 indicates a ranking for the
security in the higher end of a rating category; the modifier 2 indicates a
mid-range ranking; and the modifier 3 indicates a ranking in the lower end
of a rating category.
Municipal Note Ratings
Moody's ratings for state municipal notes and other short-term loans
are designated Moody's Investment Grade (MIG). Such ratings recognize the
differences between short-term credit risk and long-term risk. Factors
affecting the liquidity of the borrower and short-term cyclical elements
are critical in short-term ratings, while other factors of major importance
in bond risk, long-term secular trends for example, may be less important
over the short run.
A short-term rating may also be assigned on an issue having a demand
feature. Such ratings will be designated as VMIG or, if the demand feature
is not rated, as NR. Short-term ratings on issues with demand features are
differentiated by the use of the VMIG symbol to reflect such
characteristics as payment upon periodic demand rather than fixed maturity
dates and payment relying on external liquidity. Additionally, investors
should be alert to the fact that the source of payment may be limited to
the external liquidity with no or limited legal recourse to the issuer in
the event the demand is not met.
Moody's short-term ratings are designated Moody's Investment Grade as
MIG 1 or VMIG 1 through MIG 4 or VMIG 4. As the name implies, when Moody's
assigns a MIG or VMIG rating, all categories define an investment grade
situation.
MIG 1/VMIG 1
This designation denotes best quality. There is present strong
protection by established cash flows, superior liquidity support or
demonstrated broad-based access to the market for refinancing.
MIG 2/VMIG 2
This designation denotes high quality. Margins of protection are
ample although not so large as in the preceding group.
Commercial Paper Rating
The rating Prime-1 (P-1) is the highest commercial paper rating
assigned by Moody's. Issuers of P-1 paper must have a superior capacity
for repayment of short-term promissory obligations, and ordinarily will be
evidenced by leading market positions in well established industries, high
rates of return on funds employed, conservative capitalization structures
with moderate reliance on debt and ample asset protection, broad margins in
earnings coverage of fixed financial charges and high internal cash
generation, and well established access to a wide range of financial
markets and assured sources of alternative liquidity.
Issuers (or related supporting institutions) rated Prime-2 (P-2) have
a strong capacity for repayment of short-term promissory obligations. This
ordinarily will be evidenced by many of the characteristics cited above but
to a lesser degree. Earnings trends and coverage ratios, while sound, will
be more subject to variation. Capitalization characteristics, while still
appropriate, may be more affected by external conditions. Ample alternate
liquidity is maintained.
Fitch
Municipal Bond Ratings
The ratings represent Fitch's assessment of the issuer's ability to
meet the obligations of a specific debt issue or class of debt. The
ratings take into consideration special features of the issue, its
relationship to other obligations of the issuer, the current financial
condition and operative performance of the issuer and of any guarantor, as
well as the political and economic environment that might affect the
issuer's future financial strength and credit quality.
AAA
Bonds rated AAA are considered to be investment grade and of the
highest credit quality. The obligor has an exceptionally strong ability to
pay interest and repay principal, which is unlikely to be affected by
reasonably foreseeable events.
AA
Bonds rated AA are considered to be investment grade and of very high
credit quality. The obligor's ability to pay interest and repay principal
is very strong, although not quite as strong as bonds rated AAA. Because
bonds rated in the AAA and AA categories are not significantly vulnerable
to foreseeable future developments, short-term debt of these issuers is
generally rated F-1+.
A
Bonds rated A are considered to be investment grade and of high credit
quality. The obligor's ability to pay interest and repay principal is
considered to be strong, but may be more vulnerable to adverse changes in
economic conditions and circumstances than bonds with higher ratings.
BBB
Bonds rated BBB are considered to be investment grade and of
satisfactory credit quality. The obligor's ability to pay interest and
repay principal is considered to be adequate. Adverse changes in economic
conditions and circumstances, however, are more likely to have adverse
impact on these bonds and, therefore, impair timely payment. The
likelihood that the ratings of these bonds will fall below investment grade
is higher than for bonds with higher ratings.
BB
Bonds rated BB are considered speculative. The obligor's ability to
pay interest and repay principal may be affected over time by adverse
economic changes. However, business and financial alternatives can be
identified which could assist the obligor in satisfying its debt service
requirements.
B
Bonds rated B are considered highly speculative. While bonds in this
class are currently meeting debt service requirements, the probability of
continued timely payment of principal and interest reflects the obligor's
limited margin of safety and the need for reasonable business and economic
activity throughout the life of the issue.
CCC
Bonds rated CCC have certain identifiable characteristics, which, if
not remedied, may lead to default. The ability to meet obligations
requires an advantageous business and economic environment.
CC
Bonds rated CC are minimally protected. Default in payment of
interest and/or principal seems probable over time.
C
Bonds rated C are in imminent default in payment of interest or
principal.
DDD, DD and D
Bonds rated DDD, DD and D are in actual or imminent default of
interest and/or principal payments. Such bonds are extremely speculative
and should be valued on the basis of their ultimate recovery value in
liquidation or reorganization of the obligor. DDD represents the highest
potential for recovery on these bonds and D represents the lowest potential
for recovery.
Plus (+) and minus (-) signs are used with a rating symbol to indicate
the relative position of a credit within the rating category. Plus and
minus signs, however, are not used in the AAA category covering 12-36
months or the DDD, DD or D categories.
Short-Term Ratings
Fitch's short-term ratings apply to debt obligations that are payable
on demand or have original maturities of up to three years, including
commercial paper, certificates of deposit, medium-term notes, and municipal
and investment notes.
Although the credit analysis is similar to Fitch's bond rating
analysis, the short-term rating places greater emphasis than bond ratings
on the existence of liquidity necessary to meet the issuer's obligations in
a timely manner.
F-1+
Exceptionally Strong Credit Quality. Issues assigned this rating are
regarded as having the strongest degree of assurance for timely payment.
F-1
Very Strong Credit Quality. Issues assigned this rating reflect an
assurance of timely payment only slightly less in degree than issues rated
F-1+.
F-2
Good Credit Quality. Issues carrying this rating have a satisfactory
degree of assurance for timely payments, but the margin of safety is not as
great as the F-1+ and F-1 categories.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS SEPTEMBER 30, 1995
PRINCIPAL
LONG-TERM MUNICIPAL INVESTMENTS-100.0% AMOUNT VALUE
__________ ________
<S> <C> <C>
CALIFORNIA-97.7%
ABAG Finance Corp., COP (ABAG XXIV) 6.90%, 4/1/2012......................... $ 3,500,000 $ 3,629,500
Allan Hancock Joint Community College District, COP, Refunding 7.625%, 10/1/2005 1,055,000 1,146,817
Anaheim Public Financing Authority, Tax Allocation Revenue 6.31%, 12/28/2018 6,000,000 6,269,940
Beaumont Unified School District, COP
(Capital Improvement Project) 7.70%, 1/1/2021........................... 1,100,000 1,142,405
Berkeley, HR (Alta Bates Project) 7.65%, 12/1/2015 (Prerefunded 8/1/2000) (a) 445,000 513,530
California:
6.125%, 10/1/2011 (Insured; FGIC)....................................... 8,000,000 8,509,920
Veterans 6.25%, 2/1/2014................................................ 5,000,000 5,003,200
California Department of Water Resources, Water System Revenue
(Central Valley Project):
6.125%, 12/1/2013..................................................... 6,500,000 6,576,245
6.40%, 12/1/2026...................................................... 12,600,000 12,830,958
California Educational Facilities Authority, Revenue:
(Chapman College) 7.50%, 1/1/2018....................................... 1,760,000 1,862,344
(Refunding-Pooled College and University Financings) 6.125%, 6/1/2009... 3,000,000 3,018,150
(Stanford University) 6%, 11/1/2016..................................... 5,910,000 5,943,391
(University of San Francisco) 6.30%, 10/1/2007.......................... 2,470,000 2,596,316
California Health Facilities Authority, Revenue
(Pacific Presbyterian Hospital) 7.60%, 6/1/2015......................... 885,000 982,846
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, Revenue:
(Help Group) 7%, 8/1/2021
(Insured; California Health Facilities Construction Loan Program)..... 1,800,000 1,900,692
(Kaiser Permanente) 5.60%, 5/1/2033..................................... 3,450,000 3,177,588
(Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center) 7.375%, 1/1/2014................ 750,000 795,720
(Walden House) 6.85%, 3/1/2022.......................................... 3,225,000 3,384,412
California Housing Finance Agency, Home Mortgage Revenue:
6.10%, 8/1/2015 (Insured; MBIA)......................................... 5,765,000 5,712,077
7.50%, 8/1/2029......................................................... 1,525,000 1,595,653
7.65%, 8/1/2029......................................................... 900,000 947,682
7.60%, 8/1/2030......................................................... 1,855,000 1,965,539
7.70%, 8/1/2030......................................................... 1,540,000 1,630,229
California Pollution Control Financing Authority, SWDR
(North County Recycling Center) 6.75%, 7/1/2011
(LOC; Union Bank of Switzerland) (b).................................... 3,500,000 3,661,770
California Public Works Board, LR:
(Department of Correction - Madera State Prison) 6%, 6/1/2010........... 3,000,000 3,091,380
(Department of Correction - Susanville State Prison)
5.375%, 6/1/2018 (Insured; MBIA)...................................... 2,500,000 2,316,250
(Library and Courts Annex Building) 6%, 5/1/2013........................ 4,760,000 4,673,558
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) SEPTEMBER 30, 1995
PRINCIPAL
LONG-TERM MUNICIPAL INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) AMOUNT VALUE
__________ ________
CALIFORNIA (CONTINUED)
California Public Works Board, LR (continued):
Refunding 5.50%, 6/1/2014............................................... $ 5,000,000 $ 4,652,050
(University of California Projects):
5.55%, 6/1/2010....................................................... 3,195,000 3,107,297
6.40%, 12/1/2016 (Insured; AMBAC)..................................... 1,955,000 2,035,917
5.50%, 12/1/2018...................................................... 5,000,000 4,549,300
California Statewide Communities Development Authority, COP,
Health Facilities Revenue, Refunding (Barton Memorial Hospital)
6.50%, 12/1/2009 (LOC; Banque Nationale de Paris) (b)................... 1,600,000 1,667,072
California Statewide Communities Development Corp., COP
(Pacific Homes) 5.90%, 4/1/2009......................................... 7,000,000 7,132,440
Campbell, COP, Refunding (Civic Center Project)
6.90%, 10/1/2018 (Prerefunded 10/1/2001) (a)............................ 3,760,000 4,289,972
Chico Public Finance Authority, Revenue
(Chico Municipal Airport and Central Chico Redevelopment Project)
7.40%, 4/1/2021......................................................... 2,410,000 2,525,800
Chino Basin Regional Financing Authority, Revenue, Refunding
(Municipal Water District Sewer System Project) 6%, 8/1/2016 (Insured; AMBAC) 2,000,000 2,002,960
Commerce Joint Powers Financing Authority, Revenue, Multiple Project Loans
8%, 3/1/2022............................................................ 2,470,000 2,619,657
Compton, COP, Refunding 7.50%, 8/1/2005 (LOC; Mitsui Trust and Banking) (b). 2,680,000 2,880,384
Dry Creek Joint School District, Special Tax
(Community Facilities District Number 1) 7.25%, 9/1/2011................ 2,500,000 2,789,950
Folsom Public Financing Authority, Local Agency Revenue 7.70%, 10/1/2020.... 1,200,000 1,242,312
Fontana Public Financing Authority, Tax Allocation Revenue
(North Fontana Redevelopment Project) 7.25%, 9/1/2020................... 2,000,000 2,117,740
Fresno Unified School District, COP (Project Phase VI) 7.20%, 5/1/2011...... 4,250,000 4,509,122
Hollister Redevelopment Agency, Tax Allocation
(Hollister Community Development Project) 7.55%, 10/1/2013.............. 1,000,000 1,057,420
Inglewood, HR (Daniel Freeman Hospital) 6.75%, 5/1/2013..................... 2,000,000 2,064,420
La Mirada Redevelopment Agency
(Tax Allocation-Industrial Commercial Redevelopment)
6.80%, 8/15/2021 (Prerefunded 8/15/2000) (a)............................ 3,950,000 4,409,069
Lake Elsinore Public Financing Authority, Local Agency Revenue 8%, 10/1/2020 2,640,000 2,490,946
Los Alamitos Union Free School District, Special Tax
(Community Facilities District Number 1) 7.15%, 8/15/2021............... 2,000,000 2,046,820
Los Angeles, Harbor Department Revenue 6.60%, 8/1/2015...................... 4,240,000 4,412,102
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) SEPTEMBER 30, 1995
PRINCIPAL
LONG-TERM MUNICIPAL INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) AMOUNT VALUE
_______ _______
CALIFORNIA (CONTINUED)
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power:
Electric Plant Revenue:
6%, 6/1/2013 (Insured; MBIA).......................................... $ 3,100,000 $ 3,171,114
7.10%, 1/15/2031...................................................... 2,750,000 3,105,822
Waterworks Revenue 7.625%, 8/1/2027..................................... 2,000,000 2,176,160
Madera County, COP (Valley Childrens Hospital):
6.25%, 3/15/2007 (Insured; MBIA)........................................ 2,545,000 2,727,986
6.50%, 3/15/2008 (Insured; MBIA)........................................ 3,165,000 3,468,650
Metropolitan Water District, Southern California Waterworks Revenue
5.70%, 7/1/2011 (Insured; MBIA)......................................... 3,190,000 3,203,238
Mountain View, Shoreline Regional Park Community, Tax Allocation
5.75%, 8/1/2018......................................................... 5,000,000 4,887,700
Newhall Elementary and Castaic Union School District, COP
(School Improvement Project) 7.70%, 3/1/2011............................ 2,695,000 2,838,078
Northern California Power Agency, Public Power Revenue, Refunding
(Hydroelectric Project Number 1):
6.30%, 7/1/2018 (Insured; MBIA)....................................... 20,400,000 21,784,752
7.15%, 7/1/2024....................................................... 5,390,000 5,803,790
Orange County:
COP (Juvenile Justice Center) 7.625%, 6/1/2019 (Prerefunded 6/1/1999) (a) 2,500,000 2,813,025
Special Tax (Community Facilities District Number 87)
7.80%, 8/15/2015 (Prerefunded 8/15/2000) (a).......................... 1,500,000 1,736,505
Otay Municipal Water District (Improvement District Number 27) 6.70%, 9/1/2022 2,000,000 2,009,160
Oxnard Financing Authority, Solid Waste Revenue
6%, 5/1/2016 (Insured; AMBAC)........................................... 5,000,000 4,927,050
Palm Desert (Assessment District Number 94-1) 7.625%, 9/2/2019.............. 1,965,000 2,005,676
Port Oakland, Special Facility Revenue (Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Limited)
6.80%, 1/1/2019 (LOC; Industrial Bank of Japan) (b)..................... 3,000,000 3,071,010
Pittsburgh Redevelopment Agency, Tax Allocation
(Los Medanos Project) 5.80%, 8/1/2034................................... 5,000,000 4,886,400
Richmond Joint Powers Financing Authority, Revenue 7.25%, 5/15/2013......... 2,000,000 2,098,120
Sacramento County, Special Tax (Community Facilities District Number 1)
8.25%, 12/1/2020........................................................ 5,610,000 5,990,134
Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Electric Revenue:
6.30%, 8/1/2018 (Insured; FGIC)......................................... 8,000,000 8,080,320
5.75%, 5/15/2022........................................................ 3,795,000 3,592,271
Sacramento Schools Insurance Authority, Revenue
(Workers Compensation Program) 5.75%, 6/1/2003.......................... 6,885,000 7,081,980
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) SEPTEMBER 30, 1995
PRINCIPAL
LONG-TERM MUNICIPAL INVESTMENTS (CONTINUED) AMOUNT VALUE
_______ _______
CALIFORNIA (CONTINUED)
San Bernardino, Health Care Systems Revenue (Sisters of Charity) 7%, 7/1/2021 $ 2,000,000 $ 2,179,480
San Francisco City and County Airports Commission, International Airport
Revenue
6.25%, 5/1/2014 (Insured; AMBAC)........................................ 3,505,000 3,594,798
San Marcos Public Facilities Authority, Revenue, Refunding
(Public Improvement-Civic Center) 6.15%, 8/1/2013....................... 4,500,000 4,298,085
Santa Barbara County, COP, Refunding 5.70%, 3/1/2011........................ 5,960,000 5,851,826
Simi Valley, Single Family Residential Mortgage Revenue 7.625%, 8/1/2022 (c) 3,000,000 1,080,000
Sonoma County Office of Education, COP, Refunding
(Capital Financing Project) 5.625%, 7/1/2020............................ 3,115,000 2,813,157
Southern California Home Finance Authority, SFMR
6.90%, 10/1/2024 (Collateralized: FNMA and GNMA)........................ 1,665,000 1,725,989
Southern California Public Power Authority, Power Project Revenue
(Multiple Projects) 6.75%, 7/1/2011..................................... 3,750,000 4,089,825
Tehachapi Unified School District, COP (Tompkins Elementary School Project)
7.80%, 2/1/2021 (Prerefunded 2/1/2001) (a).............................. 1,000,000 1,166,590
Upland, HR, COP (San Antonio Community Hospital) 7.125%, 1/1/2011........... 745,000 763,893
Waterford Public Financing Authority, Revenue 8.20%, 9/15/2020.............. 3,700,000 3,955,670
Watsonville Mammoth Lakes, COP 7.875%, 6/1/2011............................. 1,770,000 1,909,175
West Sacramento Redevelopment Agency, Tax Allocation
(West Sacramento Redevelopment Project) 6.25%, 9/1/2021 (Insured; MBIA). 4,250,000 4,353,573
Yolo County Housing Authority, Mortgage Revenue (Walnut Park Apartments)
7.20%, 8/1/2033 (Insured; FHA).......................................... 4,150,000 4,342,851
Yorba Linda Redevelopment Agency, Tax Allocation Revenue
(Yorba Linda Redevelopment Project) Zero Coupon, 9/1/2019 (Insured; MBIA) 5,000,000 1,147,000
U. S. RELATED-2.3%
Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, Power Revenue 7.125%, 7/1/2014........ 540,000 585,322
Virgin Islands Port Authority, Airport Revenue
(Cyril E. King Airport Project) 8.10%, 10/1/2005........................ 4,135,000 4,547,714
Virgin Islands Territory (Hugo Insurance Claims Funds Program) 7.75%, 10/1/2006 1,760,000 1,925,933
-----------
TOTAL INVESTMENTS (cost $300,890,870)....................................... $311,270,684
=============
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
SUMMARY OF ABBREVIATIONS
<S> <C> <S> <C>
AMBAC American Municipal Bond Assurance Corporation LOC Letter of Credit
COP Certificate of Participation LR Lease Revenue
FGIC Financial Guaranty Insurance Company MBIA Municipal Bond Investors Assurance
FHA Federal Housing Administration Insurance Corporation
FNMA Federal National Mortgage Association SFMR Single Family Mortgage Revenue
GNMA Government National Mortgage Association SWDR Solid Waste Disposal Revenue
HR Hospital Revenue
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
SUMMARY OF COMBINED RATINGS (UNAUDITED)
FITCH (D) OR MOODY'S OR STANDARD & POOR'S PERCENTAGE OF VALUE
- ---- ------ ------------------ -------------------
<S> <C> <C> <C>
AAA Aaa AAA 37.4%
AA Aa AA 13.6
A A A 30.3
BBB Baa BBB 10.4
D N/A D .3
Not Rated (e) Not Rated (e) Not Rated (e) 8.0
----
100.0%
========
</TABLE>
NOTES TO STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS:
(a) Bonds which are prerefunded are collateralized by U.S. Government
securities which are held in escrow and are used to pay principal and
interest on the municipal issue and to retire the bonds in full at the
earliest refunding date.
(b) Secured by letters of credit.
(c) Non-income producing security; interest payments in default.
(d) Fitch currently provides creditworthiness information for a limited
number of investments.
(e) Securities which, while not rated by Fitch, Moody's or Standard &
Poor's, have been determined by the Manager to be of comparable quality
to those rated securities in which the Fund may invest.
See notes to financial statements.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES SEPTEMBER 30, 1995
ASSETS:
<S> <C> <C>
Investments in securities, at value
(cost $300,890,870)-see statement..................................... $311,270,684
Cash.................................................................... 707,661
Interest receivable..................................................... 5,389,673
Receivable for investment securities sold............................... 715,778
Prepaid expenses........................................................ 18,136
------------
318,101,932
LIABILITIES:
Due to The Dreyfus Corporation.......................................... $173,218
Accrued expenses........................................................ 93,241 266,459
----------- ---------
NET ASSETS ................................................................ $317,835,473
=============
REPRESENTED BY:
Paid-in capital......................................................... $304,488,724
Accumulated undistributed investment income-net......................... 47,029
Accumulated undistributed net realized gain on investments.............. 2,919,906
Accumulated net unrealized appreciation on investments-Note 3........... 10,379,814
------------
NET ASSETS at value applicable to 23,889,286 shares outstanding
(500 million shares of $.001 par value Common Stock authorized)......... $317,835,473
=============
NET ASSET VALUE, offering and redemption price per share
($317,835,473 / 23,889,286 shares)...................................... $13.30
========
See notes to financial statements.
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1995
<S> <C> <C>
INVESTMENT INCOME:
INTEREST INCOME......................................................... $20,318,018
EXPENSES:
Management fee-Note 2(a).............................................. $1,897,821
Shareholder servicing costs-Note 2(b)................................. 331,616
Custodian fees........................................................ 52,904
Professional fees..................................................... 48,566
Directors' fees and expenses-Note 2(c)................................ 30,683
Registration fees..................................................... 13,470
Prospectus and shareholders' reports.................................. 13,349
Miscellaneous......................................................... 25,647
------
TOTAL EXPENSES.................................................... 2,414,056
-------
INVESTMENT INCOME-NET............................................. 17,903,962
REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN ON INVESTMENTS:
Net realized gain on investments-Note 3................................. $2,920,516
Net unrealized appreciation on investments.............................. 7,663,008
------
NET REALIZED AND UNREALIZED GAIN ON INVESTMENTS................... 10,583,524
-------
NET INCREASE IN NET ASSETS RESULTING FROM OPERATIONS........................ $28,487,486
============
See notes to financial statements.
</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET ASSETS
YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
-----------------
1994 1995
-------- ---------
OPERATIONS:
<S> <C> <C>
Investment income-net................................................... 22,427,244 $ 17,903,962
Net realized gain on investments........................................ 2,108,962 2,920,516
Net unrealized appreciation (depreciation) on investments for the year.. (43,545,566) 7,663,008
_____________ ____________
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS RESULTING FROM OPERATIONS....... (19,009,360) 28,487,486
_____________ ____________
DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS FROM:
Investment income-net................................................... (22,427,244) (17,856,933)
Net realized gain on investments........................................ (1,957,211) (2,098,798)
_____________ ____________
TOTAL DIVIDENDS....................................................... (24,384,455) (19,955,731)
_____________ ____________
CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS:
Net proceeds from shares sold........................................... 143,167,610 136,023,008
Dividends reinvested.................................................... 17,051,843 13,460,614
Cost of shares redeemed................................................. (226,190,833) (187,243,378)
_____________ ____________
(DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS FROM CAPITAL STOCK TRANSACTIONS.............. (65,971,380) (37,759,756)
_____________ ____________
TOTAL (DECREASE) IN NET ASSETS.................................... (109,365,195) (29,228,001)
NET ASSETS:
Beginning of year....................................................... 456,428,669 347,063,474
_____________ ____________
End of year (including undistributed investment income-net; $47,029 on
September 30, 1995)................................................... $ 347,063,474 $317,835,473
=============== ==============
SHARES SHARES
_____________ ____________
CAPITAL SHARE TRANSACTIONS:
Shares sold............................................................. 10,562,987 10,429,450
Shares issued for dividends reinvested.................................. 1,251,353 1,047,791
Shares redeemed......................................................... (16,686,997) (14,495,652)
_____________ ____________
NET (DECREASE) IN SHARES OUTSTANDING.................................. (4,872,657) (3,018,411)
=============== ==============
See notes to financial statements.
</TABLE>
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
Reference is made to page 4 of the Prospectus, dated February 1, 1996.
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1-SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES:
The Fund is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 ("Act")
as a non-diversified open-end management investment company. Premier Mutual
Fund Services, Inc. (the "Distributor") acts as the distributor of the Fund's
shares, which are sold to the public without a sales charge. The Distributor,
located at One Exchange Place, Boston, Massachusetts 02109, is a wholly-owned
subsidiary of FDI Distribution Services, Inc., a provider of mutual fund
administration services, which in turn is a wholly-owned subsidiary of FDI
Holdings, Inc., the parent company of which is Boston Institutional Group,
Inc. The Dreyfus Corporation ("Manager") serves as the Fund's investment
adviser. The Manager is a direct subsidiary of Mellon Bank, N.A.
(A) PORTFOLIO VALUATION: The Fund's investments (excluding options and
financial futures on municipal and U.S. treasury securities) are valued each
business day by an independent pricing service ("Service") approved by the
Board of Directors. Investments for which quoted bid prices are readily
available and are representative of the bid side of the market in the
judgment of the Service are valued at the mean between the quoted bid prices
(as obtained by the Service from dealers in such securities) and asked prices
(as calculated by the Service based upon its evaluation of the market for
such securities). Other investments (which constitute a majority of the
portfolio securities) are carried at fair value as determined by the Service,
based on methods which include consideration of: yields or prices of
municipal securities of comparable quality, coupon, maturity and type;
indications as to values from dealers; and general market conditions. Options
and financial futures on municipal and U.S. treasury securities are valued at
the last sales price on the securities exchange on which such securities are
primarily traded or at the last sales price on the national securities market
on each business day. Investments not listed on an exchange or the national
securities market, or securities for which there were no transactions, are
valued at the average of the most recent bid and asked prices. Bid price is
used when no asked price is available.
(B) SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS AND INVESTMENT INCOME: Securities
transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Realized gain and loss from
securities transactions are recorded on the identified cost basis. Interest
income, adjusted for amortization of premiums and original issue discounts on
investments, is earned from settlement date and recognized on the accrual
basis. Securities purchased or sold on a when-issued or delayed-delivery
basis may be settled a month or more after the trade date.
The Fund follows an investment policy of investing primarily in municipal
obligations of one state. Economic changes affecting the state and certain of
its public bodies and municipalities may affect the ability of issuers within
the state to pay interest on, or repay principal of, municipal obligations
held by the Fund.
(C) DIVIDENDS TO SHAREHOLDERS: It is the policy of the Fund to declare
dividends daily from investment income-net. Such dividends are paid monthly.
Dividends from net realized capital gain are normally declared and paid
annually, but the Fund may make distributions on a more frequent basis to
comply with the distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code. To
the extent that net realized capital gain can be offset by capital loss
carryovers, if any, it is the policy of the Fund not to distribute such gain.
(D) FEDERAL INCOME TAXES: It is the policy of the Fund to continue to
qualify as a regulated investment company, which can distribute tax exempt
dividends, by complying with the applicable
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED)
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, and to make distributions of income
and net realized capital gain sufficient to relieve it from substantially all
Federal income and excise taxes.
NOTE 2-MANAGEMENT FEE AND OTHER TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATES:
(A) Pursuant to a management agreement ("Agreement") with the Manager,
the management fee is computed at the annual rate of .60 of 1% of the average
daily value of the Fund's net assets and is payable monthly. The Agreement
provides for an expense reimbursement from the Manager should the Fund's
aggregate expenses, exclusive of taxes, brokerage, interest on borrowings and
extraordinary expenses, exceed the expense limitation of any state having
jurisdiction over the Fund. The most stringent state expense limitation
applicable to the Fund presently requires reimbursement of expenses in any
full fiscal year that such expenses (exclusive of certain expenses as
described above) exceed 2 1/2% of the first $30 million, 2% of the next $70
million and 1 1/2% of the excess over $100 million of the average value of
the Fund's net assets in accordance with California "blue sky" regulations.
There was no expense reimbursement for the year ended September 30, 1995.
(B) Pursuant to the Fund's Shareholder Services Plan, the Fund reimburses
Dreyfus Service Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Manager, an
amount not to exceed an annual rate of .25 of 1% of the value of the Fund's
average daily net assets for certain allocated expenses of providing personal
services and/or maintaining shareholder accounts. The services provided may
include personal services relating to shareholder accounts, such as answering
shareholder inquiries regarding the Fund and providing reports and other
information, and services related to the maintenance of shareholder accounts.
During the year ended September 30, 1995, the Fund was charged an aggregate
of $143,052 pursuant to the Shareholder Services Plan.
(C) Each director who is not an "affiliated person" as defined in the Act
receives from the Fund an annual fee of $2,500 and an attendance fee of $250
per meeting. The Chairman of the Board receives an additional 25% of such
compensation.
NOTE 3-SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS:
The aggregate amount of purchases and sales of investment securities
amounted to $426,518,774 and $448,286,475, respectively, for the year ended
September 30, 1995, and consisted entirely of long-term and short-term
municipal investments.
At September 30, 1995, accumulated net unrealized appreciation on
investments was $10,379,814, consisting of $13,192,204 gross unrealized
appreciation and $2,812,390 gross unrealized depreciation.
At September 30, 1995, the cost of investments for Federal income tax
purposes was substantially the same as the cost for financial reporting
purposes (see the Statement of Investments).
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
REPORT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
SHAREHOLDERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS
GENERAL CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND, INC.
We have audited the accompanying statement of assets and liabilities of
General California Municipal Bond Fund, Inc., including the statement of
investments, as of September 30, 1995, and the related statement of
operations for the year then ended, the statement of changes in net assets
for each of the two years in the period then ended, and financial highlights
for each of the years indicated therein. These financial statements and
financial highlights are the responsibility of the Fund'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. Our procedures included confirmation of
securities owned as of September 30, 1995 by correspondence with the
custodian. 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 General California Municipal Bond Fund, Inc. at September 30,
1995, the results of its operations for the year then ended, the changes in
its net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the
financial highlights for each of the indicated years, in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.
[Ernst & Young LLP signature logo]
New York, New York
November 1, 1995
