Edgar Filing: EATON VANCE CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL BOND FUND

Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Form N-CSR

CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED

MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES

Investment Company Act File Number: 811-21147

Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

Two International Place, Boston, Massachusetts 02110

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

Maureen A. Gemma

Two International Place, Boston, Massachusetts 02110

(Name and Address of Agent for Services)

(617) 482-8260

(Registrant’s Telephone Number)

September 30

Date of Fiscal Year End

September 30, 2016

Date of Reporting Period

Item 1. Reports to Stockholders

LOGO

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

Annual Report

September 30, 2016

Municipal (EIM) • California (EVM) • New York (ENX)

LOGO

Commodity Futures Trading Commission Registration. Effective December 31, 2012, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) adopted certain regulatory changes that subject registered investment companies and advisers to regulation by the CFTC if a fund invests more than a prescribed level of its assets in certain CFTC-regulated instruments (including futures, certain options and swap agreements) or markets itself as providing investment exposure to such instruments. Each Fund has claimed an exclusion from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator” under the Commodity Exchange Act. Accordingly, neither the Funds nor the adviser with respect to the operation of the Funds is subject to CFTC regulation. Because of its management of other strategies, each Fund’s adviser is registered with the CFTC as a commodity pool operator and a commodity trading advisor.

Fund shares are not insured by the FDIC and are not deposits or other obligations of, or guaranteed by, any depository institution. Shares are subject to investment risks, including possible loss of principal invested.

Annual Report September 30, 2016

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

Table of Contents


Management’s Discussion of Fund Performance			2

Performance and Fund Profile


Municipal Bond Fund			4
California Municipal Bond Fund			5
New York Municipal Bond Fund			6



Endnotes and Additional Disclosures			7

Financial Statements			8

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm			38

Federal Tax Information			39

Annual Meeting of Shareholders			40

Dividend Reinvestment Plan			41

Board of Trustees’ Contract Approval			43

Management and Organization			46

Important Notices			49

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Management’s Discussion of Fund Performance¹

Economic and Market Conditions

As the period opened on October 1, 2015, U.S. Treasurys, along with municipal bonds, were about two months into a rally that would continue for most of the period.

In the closing months of 2015, concerns about the Chinese economy, falling commodity prices and uncertainty about the Federal Reserve Board’s (the Fed) interest rate decisions led many asset classes to experience dramatic volatility. But the municipal market, a high quality asset class with a generally improving credit landscape, continued its steady rally despite a Fed rate hike in December 2015. A combination of lower than expected new issue supply and strong inflows into municipal mutual funds in the final quarter of 2015 was an additional tailwind for the asset class.

In January of 2016, the municipal rally accelerated as U.S. equities experienced what was widely reported as their worst-ever start to a new year. The combination of plummeting oil prices and slowing economic growth in China helped drive a global “flight to quality,” with investors fleeing asset classes regarded as risky for the perceived safety of U.S. Treasurys and municipal bonds. Falling government interest rates around the world, driven by actions such as quantitative easing in Japan and the European Union, put many sovereign rates into negative territory and made Treasurys look attractive by comparison.

Great Britain’s June 2016 vote to leave the European Union, ongoing Fed caution, and mixed U.S. economic reports continued to fuel the municipal rally in the summer of 2016. Even the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico’s July 1, 2016 default on over $1 billion in municipal bond and debt service payments — its second default in 2016 and its largest to date — failed to put a dent in the municipal rally, as the market had expected the defaults for some time.

In the final month of the period, however, remarks by three central banks — the European Central Bank, the Bank of Japan and the Fed — seemed to indicate that rates might begin to rise sooner than markets had anticipated. As a result, municipal rates crept upward in September of 2016 and prices declined modestly for the month.

For the one-year period as a whole, the yield curve flattened for municipal AAA-rated⁷ issues. Rates rose in the one- to three-year area of the curve — driven in part by new

money market regulations set to take effect in mid-October 2016—but fell for maturities of four to 30 years. In general, longer maturities saw greater rate declines and thus better price performance. Across the yield curve, municipal bonds outperformed U.S. Treasurys for the period.

Fund Performance

For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2016, Municipal Bond Fund shares at net asset value (NAV) outperformed the 8.72% return of the Funds’ benchmark, the Bloomberg Barclays Long (22+) Year Municipal Bond Index (the Index),² while California Municipal Bond Fund and New York Municipal Bond Fund shares at NAV underperformed the Index.

The Funds’ overall strategy is to invest primarily in higher quality bonds (rated A or higher). In managing the Funds, management employs leverage through Residual Interest Bond (RIB) financing⁶ to seek to enhance the Funds’ tax-exempt income. The use of leverage has the effect of achieving additional exposure to the municipal market, and thus magnifying a fund’s exposure to its underlying investments in both up and down market environments. During this period of generally falling rates and rising prices in the medium- and long-maturity areas of the municipal yield curve, the use of leverage contributed to performance versus the Index — which does not employ leverage — for all three Funds.

Management hedges to various degrees against the greater potential risk of volatility caused by the use of leverage and investing in bonds at the long end of the yield curve, by using Treasury futures and/or interest-rate swaps. As a risk management tactic within the Funds’ overall strategy, interest rate hedging is intended to moderate performance on both the upside and the downside of the market. During this period of positive performance by municipal bonds, the Funds’ Treasury futures hedge mitigated some of the upside and thus detracted modestly from the Funds’ performance relative to the unhedged Index.

Fund-specific Results

Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund shares at NAV returned 10.19%, outperforming the 8.72% return of the Index. The main contributors to performance versus the Index included leverage, as mentioned earlier; security selection in the special tax sector, which was the best-performing sector in the Index during the period; and an overweight, relative to the Index,

See Endnotes and Additional Disclosures in this report.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Returns are historical and are calculated by determining the percentage change in net asset value (NAV) or market price (as applicable) with all distributions reinvested and include management fees and other expenses. Fund performance at market price will differ from its results at NAV due to factors such as changing perceptions about the Fund, market conditions, fluctuations in supply and demand for Fund shares, or changes in Fund distributions. Investment return and principal value will fluctuate so that shares, when sold, may be worth more or less than their original cost. Performance less than or equal to one year is cumulative. Performance is for the stated time period only; due to market volatility, current Fund performance may be lower or higher than the quoted return. For performance as of the most recent month-end, please refer to eatonvance.com.


		2

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Management’s Discussion of Fund Performance—continued

in zero coupon bonds, which were the best-performing coupon structure in the Index during the period. The chief detractors from performance relative to the Index were the Fund’s hedging strategy, an overweight in prerefunded, or escrowed, bonds; and an underweight and security selection in A-rated and BBB-rated bonds.

Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund shares at NAV returned 8.22%, underperforming the 8.72% return of the Index. The Fund’s hedging strategy, an overweight in prerefunded bonds, and an underweight and security selection in A-rated and BBB-rated bonds all detracted from performance versus the Index. In contrast, leverage contributed to performance relative to the Index, as did an overweight in zero coupon bonds and an overweight and security selection in insured Puerto Rico bonds. The majority of the Fund’s Puerto Rico holdings were insured by various municipal bond insurers. It should be noted that most uninsured bonds issued by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and its various conduit issuers were no longer included in the Index. As Puerto Rico continued to deal with an ongoing fiscal crisis, bonds issued by its various legal entities were impacted by a number of factors throughout the period. As the period ended, the situation in Puerto Rico was continuing to evolve.

Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund shares at NAV returned 8.01%, underperforming the 8.72% return of the Index. Key detractors from performance versus the Index included the Fund’s hedging strategy, an overweight in prerefunded bonds, and an underweight in A-rated and BBB-rated bonds. Primary contributors to performance relative to the Index included leverage, an overweight in the industrial development revenue sector, and an overweight in the special tax sector.

See Endnotes and Additional Disclosures in this report.


		3

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Performance^2,3

Portfolio Manager Cynthia J. Clemson


% Average Annual Total Returns	Inception Date		One Year			Five Years			Ten Years
Fund at NAV		08/30/2002		10.19	%		9.20	%		5.88	%
Fund at Market Price		—		14.91			8.24			5.71
Bloomberg Barclays Long (22+) Year Municipal Bond Index		—		8.72	%		6.42	%		5.29	%


% Premium/Discount to NAV⁴
										–5.94	%


Distributions⁵
Total Distributions per share for the period									$	0.727
Distribution Rate at NAV										4.60	%
Taxable-Equivalent Distribution Rate at NAV										8.13	%
Distribution Rate at Market Price										4.89	%
Taxable-Equivalent Distribution Rate at Market Price										8.64	%


% Total Leverage⁶
Residual Interest Bond (RIB) Financing										38.44	%

Fund Profile

Credit Quality (% of total investments)^7,8

LOGO

See Endnotes and Additional Disclosures in this report.


		4

Eaton Vance

California Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Performance^2,3

Portfolio Manager Craig R. Brandon, CFA


% Average Annual Total Returns	Inception Date		One Year			Five Years			Ten Years
Fund at NAV		08/30/2002		8.22	%		8.16	%		4.78	%
Fund at Market Price		—		22.99			8.03			5.49
Bloomberg Barclays Long (22+) Year Municipal Bond Index		—		8.72	%		6.42	%		5.29	%


% Premium/Discount to NAV⁴
										+3.91	%


Distributions⁵
Total Distributions per share for the period									$	0.684
Distribution Rate at NAV										5.24	%
Taxable-Equivalent Distribution Rate at NAV										10.68	%
Distribution Rate at Market Price										5.04	%
Taxable-Equivalent Distribution Rate at Market Price										10.27	%


% Total Leverage⁶
RIB Financing										40.98	%

Fund Profile

Credit Quality (% of total investments)^7,8

LOGO

See Endnotes and Additional Disclosures in this report.


		5

Eaton Vance

New York Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Performance^2,3

Portfolio Manager Craig R. Brandon, CFA


% Average Annual Total Returns	Inception Date		One Year			Five Years			Ten Years
Fund at NAV		08/30/2002		8.01	%		7.33	%		5.19	%
Fund at Market Price		—		19.75			6.93			5.56
Bloomberg Barclays Long (22+) Year Municipal Bond Index		—		8.72	%		6.42	%		5.29	%


% Premium/Discount to NAV⁴
										+0.21	%


Distributions⁵
Total Distributions per share for the period									$	0.718
Distribution Rate at NAV										5.02	%
Taxable-Equivalent Distribution Rate at NAV										9.73	%
Distribution Rate at Market Price										5.01	%
Taxable-Equivalent Distribution Rate at Market Price										9.71	%


% Total Leverage⁶
RIB Financing										39.00	%

Fund Profile

Credit Quality (% of total investments)^7,8

LOGO

See Endnotes and Additional Disclosures in this report.


		6

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Endnotes and Additional Disclosures

The views expressed in this report are those of the portfolio manager(s) and are current only through the date stated at the top of this page. These views are subject to change at any time based upon market or other conditions, and Eaton Vance and the Fund(s) disclaim any responsibility to update such views. These views may not be relied upon as investment advice and, because investment decisions are based on many factors, may not be relied upon as an indication of trading intent on behalf of any Eaton Vance fund. This commentary may contain statements that are not historical facts, referred to as “forward looking statements”. The Fund’s actual future results may differ significantly from those stated in any forward looking statement, depending on factors such as changes in securities or financial markets or general economic conditions, the volume of sales and purchases of Fund shares, the continuation of investment advisory, administrative and service contracts, and other risks discussed from time to time in the Fund’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Bloomberg Barclays Long (22+) Year Municipal Bond Index is an unmanaged index of municipal bonds traded in the U.S. with maturities of 22 years or more. Prior to August 24, 2016, Bloomberg Barclays Long (22+) Year Municipal Bond Index was named Barclays Long (22+) Year Municipal Bond Index. Unless otherwise stated, index returns do not reflect the effect of any applicable sales charges, commissions, expenses, taxes or leverage, as applicable. It is not possible to invest directly in an index.

³	Performance results reflect the effects of leverage. Performance since inception for an index, if presented, is the performance since the Fund’s or oldest share class’ inception, as applicable.

⁴	The shares of the Fund often trade at a discount or premium from their net asset value. The discount or premium of the Fund may vary over time and may be higher or lower than what is quoted in this report. For up-to-date premium/discount information, please refer to http://eatonvance.com/closedend.

⁵

The Distribution Rate is based on the Fund’s last regular distribution per share in the period (annualized) divided by the Fund’s NAV or market price at the end of the period. The Fund’s distributions may be comprised of amounts characterized for federal income tax purposes as tax-exempt income, qualified and non-qualified ordinary dividends, capital gains and nondividend distributions, also known as return of capital. The Fund will determine the federal income tax character of distributions paid to a shareholder after the end of the calendar year. This is reported on the IRS form 1099-DIV and provided to the shareholder shortly after each year-end. For information about the tax character of distributions made in prior calendar years, please refer to Performance-Tax Character of Distributions on the Fund’s webpage available at eatonvance.com. The Fund’s distributions are determined by the investment adviser based on its current assessment of the Fund’s long-term return potential. Fund distributions may be affected by numerous factors including changes in Fund performance, the cost of financing for Funds that employ leverage, portfolio holdings, realized and projected returns, and other factors. As portfolio and market conditions change, the rate of distributions paid by the Fund could change.

Taxable-equivalent performance is based on the highest combined federal and state income tax rates, where applicable. Lower tax rates would result in lower tax-equivalent performance. Actual tax rates will vary depending on your income, exemptions and deductions. Rates do not include local taxes. Subsequent distributions declared, but not reflected in Fund Performance, reflect a reduction of the monthly distribution for California Municipal Bond Fund and New York Municipal Bond Fund.

⁶

Fund employs RIB financing. The leverage created by RIB investments provides an opportunity for increased income but, at the same time, creates special risks (including the likelihood of greater price volatility). The cost of leverage rises and falls with changes in short-term interest rates. See “Floating Rate Notes Issued in Conjunction with Securities Held” in the notes to the financial statements for more information about RIB financing. RIB leverage represents the amount of Floating Rate Notes outstanding at period end as a percentage of Fund net assets plus Floating Rate Notes.

⁷

Ratings are based on Moody’s, S&P or Fitch, as applicable. If securities are rated differently by the ratings agencies, the higher rating is applied. Ratings, which are subject to change, apply to the creditworthiness of the issuers of the underlying securities and not to the Fund or its shares. Credit ratings measure the quality of a bond based on the issuer’s creditworthiness, with ratings ranging from AAA, being the highest, to D, being the lowest based on S&P’s measures. Ratings of BBB or higher by S&P or Fitch (Baa or higher by Moody’s) are considered to be investment-grade quality. Credit ratings are based largely on the ratings agency’s analysis at the time of rating. The rating assigned to any particular security is not necessarily a reflection of the issuer’s current financial condition and does not necessarily reflect its assessment of the volatility of a security’s market value or of the liquidity of an investment in the security. Holdings designated as “Not Rated” are not rated by the national ratings agencies stated above.

⁸	The chart includes the municipal bonds held by a trust that issues residual interest bonds, consistent with the Portfolio of Investments.

Fund profile subject to change due to active management.


		7

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments


Tax-Exempt Investments — 160.9%


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Education — 15.1%
California Educational Facilities Authority, (University of Southern California), Prerefunded to 10/1/18, 5.25%, 10/1/38⁽¹⁾	$	9,750	$	10,616,483
Houston Higher Education Finance Corp., TX, (St. John’s School), 5.25%, 9/1/33		3,985		4,596,259
Houston Higher Education Finance Corp., TX, (William Marsh Rice University), 5.00%, 5/15/35⁽¹⁾		15,000		17,026,950
Massachusetts Health and Educational Facilities Authority, (Boston College), 5.50%, 6/1/27		5,810		7,822,991
Massachusetts Health and Educational Facilities Authority, (Boston College), 5.50%, 6/1/30		8,325		11,422,399
New York Dormitory Authority, (Rockefeller University), 5.00%, 7/1/40⁽¹⁾		15,300		16,981,776
North Carolina Capital Facilities Finance Agency, (Duke University), 5.00%, 10/1/38⁽¹⁾		13,500		14,825,295
North Carolina Capital Facilities Finance Agency, (Duke University), 5.00%, 10/1/41⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,157,100
University of California, Prerefunded to 5/15/19, 5.25%, 5/15/39		720		802,318
University of California, Prerefunded to 5/15/19, 5.25%, 5/15/39		2,460		2,741,252
University of Massachusetts Building Authority, 5.00%, 11/1/39⁽¹⁾		14,175		16,898,584
University of Michigan, 5.00%, 4/1/40		25		30,685
University of Michigan, 5.00%, 4/1/40⁽¹⁾		15,000		18,410,700
University of Nebraska, 5.00%, 7/1/40		20		24,047
University of Nebraska, 5.00%, 7/1/40⁽¹⁾		11,800		14,187,966

			$	148,544,805


Electric Utilities — 2.4%
Energy Northwest, WA, (Columbia Generating Station), 5.00%, 7/1/40	$	2,320	$	2,766,020
Pima County Industrial Development Authority, AZ, (Tucson Electric Power Co.), 5.25%, 10/1/40		10,000		11,213,500
Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City Board of Public Utilities, KS, 5.00%, 9/1/36		3,425		3,939,298
Utility Debt Securitization Authority, NY, 5.00%, 12/15/35		4,500		5,448,960

			$	23,367,778


Escrowed / Prerefunded — 6.0%
Charleston, SC, Waterworks and Sewer Revenue, Prerefunded to 1/1/21, 5.00%, 1/1/35	$	2,735	$	3,192,456
Connecticut Health and Educational Facilities Authority, (Wesleyan University), Prerefunded to 7/1/20, 5.00%, 7/1/39⁽¹⁾		14,700		16,857,225


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Escrowed / Prerefunded (continued)
Honolulu City and County, HI, Wastewater System, Prerefunded to 7/1/21, 5.25%, 7/1/36⁽¹⁾	$	9,750	$	11,650,958
Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, Prerefunded to 12/1/20, 6.00%, 12/1/34		720		866,966
South Carolina Public Service Authority, Prerefunded to 1/1/19, 5.50%, 1/1/38		565		622,624
Tarrant County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp., TX, (Scott & White Healthcare), Prerefunded to 8/15/20, 5.25%, 8/15/40		450		522,653
Tarrant County Cultural Education Facilities Finance Corp., TX, (Scott & White Healthcare), Prerefunded to 8/15/20, 5.25%, 8/15/40		5,655		6,568,000
Tennessee School Bond Authority, Prerefunded to 5/1/18, 5.50%, 5/1/38		5,000		5,368,400
University of California, Prerefunded to 5/15/19, 5.25%, 5/15/39		1,270		1,415,199
University of Colorado, (University Enterprise Revenue), Prerefunded to 6/1/21, 5.25%, 6/1/36⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,939,100

			$	59,003,581


General Obligations — 17.3%
California, 5.00%, 10/1/33	$	15	$	18,525
California, 5.00%, 10/1/33⁽¹⁾		18,800		23,217,812
Chicago Park District, IL, (Harbor Facilities), 5.25%, 1/1/37⁽¹⁾		8,320		9,251,507
Delaware Valley Regional Finance Authority, PA, 5.75%, 7/1/32		3,000		3,975,870
Klein Independent School District, TX, (PSF Guaranteed), 5.00%, 2/1/36⁽¹⁾		2,000		2,312,500
Massachusetts, 5.00%, 7/1/35⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,155,700
Miami-Dade County, FL, 4.00%, 7/1/37		15,970		17,913,868
Mississippi, 5.00%, 10/1/30⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,802,500
Mississippi, 5.00%, 10/1/36⁽¹⁾		12,075		14,161,802
New York, NY, 5.00%, 10/1/32		10,000		12,021,100
Oregon, 5.00%, 8/1/35⁽¹⁾		6,750		7,864,020
Oregon, 5.00%, 8/1/36		2,000		2,330,080
Port of Houston Authority of Harris County, TX, 5.00%, 10/1/35		7,500		8,612,925
Tacoma School District No. 10, WA, 5.00%, 12/1/39⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,055,100
Washington, 4.00%, 7/1/28⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,185,400
Washington, 5.00%, 2/1/35⁽¹⁾		18,250		21,762,030

			$	170,640,739


Hospital — 13.0%
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (Catholic Healthcare West), 5.25%, 3/1/27	$	1,000	$	1,168,740


		8		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Hospital (continued)
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (Catholic Healthcare West), 5.25%, 3/1/28	$	1,770	$	2,049,678
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (Cedars-Sinai Medical Center), 5.00%, 8/15/39		11,570		12,770,619
Hawaii Department of Budget and Finance, (Hawaii Pacific Health), 5.50%, 7/1/38		2,790		3,342,448
Highlands County Health Facilities Authority, FL, (Adventist Health System), 5.25%, 11/15/36		7,190		7,230,983
Knox County Health, Educational and Housing Facilities Board, TN, (Covenant Health), 0.00%, 1/1/38		5,040		1,753,164
Knox County Health, Educational and Housing Facilities Board, TN, (Covenant Health), 0.00%, 1/1/41		10,000		2,974,800
Massachusetts Development Finance Agency, (Partners HealthCare System), 5.00%, 7/1/41⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,017,200
Michigan Hospital Finance Authority, (Henry Ford Health System), 5.25%, 11/15/46		5,355		5,383,167
New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority, (Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital), 5.25%, 7/1/35		4,385		5,161,145
Ohio Higher Educational Facility Commission, (Cleveland Clinic Health System), 5.00%, 1/1/32		10,950		12,746,238
Tampa, FL, (BayCare Health System), 5.00%, 11/15/46⁽¹⁾		12,000		14,349,120
Vermont Educational and Health Buildings Financing Agency, (University of Vermont Medical Center), 4.00%, 12/1/42		5,000		5,340,950
Vermont Educational and Health Buildings Financing Agency, (University of Vermont Medical Center), 5.00%, 12/1/46		1,600		1,882,224
West Virginia Hospital Finance Authority, (West Virginia United Health System Obligated Group), 5.375%, 6/1/38		7,605		8,963,253
Wisconsin Health and Educational Facilities Authority, (Ascension Health Alliance Senior Credit Group), 5.00%, 11/15/41⁽¹⁾		11,500		13,226,725
Wisconsin Health and Educational Facilities Authority, (Ascension Senior Credit Group), 4.50%, 11/15/39		16,000		18,382,400

			$	128,742,854


Industrial Development Revenue — 0.5%
Maricopa County Pollution Control Corp., AZ, (El Paso Electric Co.), 4.50%, 8/1/42	$	4,245	$	4,522,538

			$	4,522,538


Insured – Education — 2.2%
Massachusetts Development Finance Agency, (College of the Holy Cross), (AMBAC), 5.25%, 9/1/32	$	15,900	$	21,588,066

			$	21,588,066


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Insured – Electric Utilities — 0.6%
Louisiana Energy and Power Authority, (AGM), 5.25%, 6/1/38	$	4,905	$	5,745,177

			$	5,745,177


Insured – Escrowed / Prerefunded — 10.9%
American Municipal Power-Ohio, Inc., OH, (Prairie State Energy Campus), (AGC), Prerefunded to 2/15/19, 5.75%, 2/15/39	$	5,000	$	5,564,450
Bossier City, LA, Utilities Revenue, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 10/1/18, 5.25%, 10/1/26		3,185		3,458,719
Bossier City, LA, Utilities Revenue, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 10/1/18, 5.25%, 10/1/27		1,985		2,155,591
Bossier City, LA, Utilities Revenue, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 10/1/18, 5.50%, 10/1/38		3,170		3,458,121
Colorado Health Facilities Authority, (Catholic Health), (AGM), Prerefunded to 4/29/18, 5.10%, 10/1/41⁽¹⁾		11,500		12,272,340
District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority, (AGC), Prerefunded to 10/1/18, 5.00%, 10/1/34⁽¹⁾		8,500		9,197,255
Iowa Finance Authority, Health Facilities, (Iowa Health System), (AGC), Prerefunded to 8/15/19, 5.625%, 8/15/37		2,625		2,972,996
Kane, Cook and DuPage Counties School District No. 46, IL, (AMBAC), Escrowed to Maturity, 0.00%, 1/1/22		13,145		12,232,080
New Jersey Economic Development Authority, (School Facilities Construction), (AGC), Prerefunded to 12/15/18, 5.50%, 12/15/34		1,875		2,064,262
Paducah Electric Plant Board, KY, (AGC), Prerefunded to 4/1/19, 5.25%, 10/1/35		2,735		3,030,216
Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority, FL, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 10/1/19, 5.00%, 10/1/24		775		867,334
Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority, FL, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 10/1/19, 5.00%, 10/1/26		1,575		1,762,645
Palm Springs Unified School District, CA, (AGC), Prerefunded to 8/1/19, 5.00%, 8/1/32		8,955		9,991,899
San Diego County Water Authority, CA, Certificates of Participation, (AGM), Prerefunded to 5/1/18, 5.00%, 5/1/38⁽¹⁾		24,000		25,592,640
South Carolina Public Service Authority, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 1/1/19, 5.50%, 1/1/38		625		688,744
Texas Transportation Commission, (Central Texas Turnpike System), (AMBAC), Escrowed to Maturity, 0.00%, 8/15/20		5,570		5,311,051
Washington Health Care Facilities Authority, (MultiCare Health System), (AGC), Prerefunded to 8/15/19, 6.00%, 8/15/39		5,795		6,634,116

			$	107,254,459


		9		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Insured – General Obligations — 7.2%
Chicago Park District, IL, (Limited Tax Park), (BAM), 5.00%, 1/1/39	$	35	$	39,264
Chicago Park District, IL, (Limited Tax Park), (BAM), 5.00%, 1/1/39⁽¹⁾		13,600		15,256,888
Cincinnati City School District, OH, (AGM), (FGIC), 5.25%, 12/1/30		3,750		5,091,975
Clark County, NV, (AMBAC), 2.50%, 11/1/36		11,845		11,041,317
Frisco Independent School District, TX, (AGM), (PSF Guaranteed), 2.75%, 8/15/39		9,530		9,417,927
Kane, Cook and DuPage Counties School District No. 46, IL, (AMBAC), 0.00%, 1/1/22		16,605		14,867,619
Port Arthur Independent School District, TX, (AGC), 4.75%, 2/15/38⁽¹⁾		10,950		11,501,333
Yuma and La Paz Counties Community College District, AZ, (Arizona Western College), (NPFG), 3.75%, 7/1/31		4,275		4,281,968

			$	71,498,291


Insured – Hospital — 9.5%
Arizona Health Facilities Authority, (Banner Health), (BHAC), 5.375%, 1/1/32	$	8,250	$	8,694,922
California Statewide Communities Development Authority, (Sutter Health), (AGM), 5.05%, 8/15/38⁽¹⁾		11,000		11,733,920
Illinois Finance Authority, (Children’s Memorial Hospital), (AGC), 5.25%, 8/15/47⁽¹⁾		15,000		15,945,000
Maricopa County Industrial Development Authority, AZ, (Catholic Healthcare West), (BHAC), 5.25%, 7/1/32		1,675		1,728,366
Maryland Health and Higher Educational Facilities Authority, (LifeBridge Health), (AGC), 4.75%, 7/1/47⁽¹⁾		17,450		17,837,564
New Jersey Health Care Facilities Financing Authority, (Virtua Health), (AGC), 5.50%, 7/1/38		13,115		14,614,569
Washington Health Care Facilities Authority, (Providence Health Care), Series C, (AGM), 5.25%, 10/1/33⁽¹⁾		8,700		9,378,774
Washington Health Care Facilities Authority, (Providence Health Care), Series D, (AGM), 5.25%, 10/1/33⁽¹⁾		12,605		13,605,584

			$	93,538,699


Insured – Industrial Development Revenue — 1.0%
Pennsylvania Economic Development Financing Authority, (Aqua Pennsylvania, Inc.), (BHAC), 5.00%, 10/1/39⁽¹⁾	$	9,000	$	9,985,320

			$	9,985,320


Insured – Lease Revenue / Certificates of Participation — 0.1%
New Jersey Economic Development Authority, (School Facilities Construction), (AGC), 5.50%, 12/15/34	$	1,035	$	1,121,360

			$	1,121,360


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Insured – Other Revenue — 1.6%
Harris County-Houston Sports Authority, TX, (AGM), (NPFG), 0.00%, 11/15/34	$	16,795	$	8,530,348
New York City Industrial Development Agency, NY, (Yankee Stadium), (AGC), 7.00%, 3/1/49		6,750		7,708,433

			$	16,238,781


Insured – Solid Waste — 0.2%
Palm Beach County Solid Waste Authority, FL, (BHAC), 5.00%, 10/1/24	$	1,985	$	2,220,858

			$	2,220,858


Insured – Special Tax Revenue — 5.6%
Alabama Public School and College Authority, (AGM), 2.50%, 12/1/27	$	15,975	$	16,050,881
Houston, TX, Hotel Occupancy Tax, (AMBAC), 0.00%, 9/1/24		18,035		14,831,082
Miami-Dade County, FL, Professional Sports Franchise Facilities, (AGC), 7.00%, (0.00% until 10/1/19), 10/1/39		15,000		18,274,500
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., (NPFG), 0.00%, 8/1/45		28,945		5,846,022

			$	55,002,485


Insured – Student Loan — 0.6%
Maine Educational Loan Authority, (AGC), 5.625%, 12/1/27	$	5,540	$	6,036,938

			$	6,036,938


Insured – Transportation — 12.8%
Chicago, IL, (O’Hare International Airport), (AGM), 4.75%, 1/1/34⁽¹⁾	$	21,640	$	22,533,947
Chicago, IL, (O’Hare International Airport), (AGM), 5.00%, 1/1/28		2,500		2,964,525
Chicago, IL, (O’Hare International Airport), (AGM), 5.00%, 1/1/29		1,000		1,183,860
Chicago, IL, (O’Hare International Airport), (AGM), 5.125%, 1/1/30		1,800		2,130,750
Chicago, IL, (O’Hare International Airport), (AGM), 5.125%, 1/1/31		1,570		1,853,432
Chicago, IL, (O’Hare International Airport), (AGM), 5.25%, 1/1/32		1,015		1,202,055
Chicago, IL, (O’Hare International Airport), (AGM), 5.25%, 1/1/33		1,150		1,361,186
Clark County, NV, (Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport), (AGM), 5.25%, 7/1/39		8,080		8,994,575
E-470 Public Highway Authority, CO, (NPFG), 0.00%, 9/1/21		10,200		9,326,370
E-470 Public Highway Authority, CO, (NPFG), 0.00%, 9/1/39		25,000		9,092,250
Harris County, TX, Toll Road Revenue, (BHAC), (NPFG), 5.00%, 8/15/33⁽¹⁾		7,800		8,082,594


		10		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Insured – Transportation (continued)
Manchester, NH, (Manchester-Boston Regional Airport), (AGM), 5.125%, 1/1/30	$	6,710	$	7,128,905
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, D.C., (BHAC), 5.00%, 10/1/29		1,785		1,978,601
New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority, (AGC), 5.50%, 12/15/38		11,700		12,596,805
North Carolina Turnpike Authority, (Triangle Expressway System), (AGC), 5.50%, 1/1/29		1,015		1,101,275
North Carolina Turnpike Authority, (Triangle Expressway System), (AGC), 5.75%, 1/1/39		1,160		1,266,071
Port Palm Beach District, FL, (XLCA), 0.00%, 9/1/24		1,605		1,166,193
Port Palm Beach District, FL, (XLCA), 0.00%, 9/1/25		1,950		1,354,587
Port Palm Beach District, FL, (XLCA), 0.00%, 9/1/26		1,000		666,660
San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agency, CA, (Toll Road Bonds), (NPFG), 0.00%, 1/15/25		26,215		20,834,109
Texas Transportation Commission, (Central Texas Turnpike System), (AMBAC), 0.00%, 8/15/20		10,275		9,681,105

			$	126,499,855


Insured – Water and Sewer — 5.1%
Chicago, IL, Wastewater Transmission Revenue, (BHAC), 5.50%, 1/1/38	$	2,060	$	2,157,356
Chicago, IL, Wastewater Transmission Revenue, (NPFG), 0.00%, 1/1/23		13,670		11,570,151
DeKalb County, GA, Water and Sewerage Revenue, (AGM), 5.25%, 10/1/32⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,797,500
Detroit, MI, Water Supply System, (NPFG), 5.00%, 7/1/34		10		10,032
Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, (AGM), 5.25%, 8/1/32		5,540		7,627,417
Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, (AGM), 5.25%, 8/1/38		1,070		1,513,483
Michigan Finance Authority, (Detroit Water and Sewerage Department), (AGM), 5.00%, 7/1/32		2,615		3,073,043
Michigan Finance Authority, (Detroit Water and Sewerage Department), (AGM), 5.00%, 7/1/33		2,240		2,623,757
Michigan Finance Authority, (Detroit Water and Sewerage Department), (AGM), 5.00%, 7/1/35		2,730		3,176,846
Michigan Finance Authority, (Detroit Water and Sewerage Department), (AGM), 5.00%, 7/1/37		2,240		2,594,726
San Luis Obispo County, CA, (Nacimiento Water Project), (NPFG), 4.50%, 9/1/40		3,535		3,647,696

			$	50,792,007


Lease Revenue / Certificates of Participation — 3.4%
Hudson Yards Infrastructure Corp., NY, 5.75%, 2/15/47	$	1,980	$	2,334,559
North Carolina, Limited Obligation Bonds, 5.00%, 5/1/26		10		12,414
North Carolina, Limited Obligation Bonds, 5.00%, 5/1/26⁽¹⁾		16,000		19,863,200


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Lease Revenue / Certificates of Participation (continued)
North Carolina, Limited Obligation Bonds, 5.00%, 5/1/30⁽¹⁾	$	10,000	$	11,605,100

			$	33,815,273


Other Revenue — 2.6%
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, NY, (Building Aid), 5.00%, 7/15/36⁽¹⁾	$	10,750	$	12,466,130
Oregon Department of Administrative Services, Lottery Revenue, 5.25%, 4/1/30		9,200		10,736,124
Texas Municipal Gas Acquisition and Supply Corp. III, Gas Supply Revenue, 5.00%, 12/15/30		1,700		1,939,785

			$	25,142,039


Senior Living / Life Care — 0.1%
Maryland Health and Higher Educational Facilities Authority, (Charlestown Community, Inc.), 6.125%, 1/1/30	$	1,175	$	1,375,020

			$	1,375,020


Special Tax Revenue — 15.1%
Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, WA, Sales and Use Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 11/1/30	$	20	$	25,000
Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, WA, Sales and Use Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 11/1/30⁽¹⁾		12,575		15,718,624
Connecticut, Special Tax Obligation, (Transportation Infrastructure), 5.00%, 1/1/31⁽¹⁾		20,000		23,925,000
Massachusetts School Building Authority, Dedicated Sales Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 8/15/37⁽¹⁾		20,200		24,555,322
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, NY, Future Tax Revenue, 3.00%, 2/1/39⁽¹⁾		15,000		15,225,300
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, NY, Future Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 2/1/37⁽¹⁾		20,000		23,587,600
New York Convention Center Development Corp., Hotel Occupancy Tax, 5.00%, 11/15/45⁽¹⁾		13,000		15,578,030
New York Dormitory Authority, Personal Income Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 6/15/31		10,000		12,034,300
New York Dormitory Authority, Sales Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 3/15/34		3,285		3,914,373
New York Dormitory Authority, Sales Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 3/15/35		12,040		14,330,490

			$	148,894,039


Transportation — 13.4%
Dallas and Fort Worth, TX, (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport), 5.25%, 11/1/30	$	3,205	$	3,935,099
Dallas and Fort Worth, TX, (Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport), 5.25%, 11/1/31		4,950		6,062,809


		11		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Transportation (continued)
Delaware River Port Authority of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 5.00%, 1/1/35	$	8,275	$	9,235,645
Illinois Toll Highway Authority, 5.00%, 1/1/37⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,934,900
Kansas Department of Transportation, 5.00%, 9/1/35⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,347,500
Los Angeles Department of Airports, CA, (Los Angeles International Airport), 5.25%, 5/15/28		3,285		3,777,159
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, NY, 5.25%, 11/15/32		4,380		5,416,877
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, NY, 5.25%, 11/15/38		4,640		5,519,141
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, NY, 5.25%, 11/15/40		4,735		5,453,631
Miami-Dade County, FL, (Miami International Airport), 5.00%, 10/1/41		10,825		12,048,333
Miami-Dade County, FL, Aviation Revenue, 5.00%, 10/1/37		4,615		5,495,034
New Jersey Transportation Trust Fund Authority, (Transportation System), 5.00%, 12/15/24		10,000		11,633,500
Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority, FL, 5.00%, 7/1/35		2,915		3,268,327
Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority, FL, 5.00%, 7/1/40		2,590		2,901,914
Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, 6.00%, 12/1/34		4,280		5,051,513
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 5.00%, 12/1/34⁽¹⁾		14,360		17,394,412
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 5.00%, 7/15/39		5,000		5,652,650
Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, NY, 5.00%, 11/15/33		5,000		5,332,150

			$	132,460,594


Water and Sewer — 14.6%
California Department of Water Resources, 5.25%, 12/1/35⁽¹⁾	$	9,715	$	11,383,447
California Department of Water Resources, (Central Valley Project), Prerefunded to 12/1/20, 5.25%, 12/1/35		285		335,488
Charleston, SC, Waterworks and Sewer Revenue, 5.00%, 1/1/45⁽¹⁾		25,000		29,963,500
Dallas, TX, Waterworks and Sewer System, 5.00%, 10/1/41⁽¹⁾		15,000		18,345,300
Detroit, MI, Sewage Disposal System, 5.00%, 7/1/32		1,070		1,199,663
Detroit, MI, Sewage Disposal System, 5.25%, 7/1/39		1,965		2,228,015
Detroit, MI, Water Supply System, 5.25%, 7/1/41		2,910		3,236,036
King County, WA, Sewer Revenue, 5.00%, 1/1/34⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,512,400
Marco Island, FL, Utility System, 5.00%, 10/1/34		1,445		1,638,211
Marco Island, FL, Utility System, 5.00%, 10/1/40		6,325		7,175,966
Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District, MO, 5.00%, 5/1/35⁽¹⁾		8,750		10,718,575
Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District, MO, 5.00%, 5/1/36⁽¹⁾		7,925		9,680,070
New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, NY, 5.00%, 6/15/31		10,000		11,877,600
Portland, OR, Water System, 5.00%, 5/1/36		5,385		6,193,181


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Water and Sewer (continued)
Texas Water Development Board, 5.00%, 10/15/40⁽¹⁾	$	15,500	$	18,955,415

			$	144,442,867


Total Tax-Exempt Investments — 160.9% (identified cost $1,427,514,200)			$	1,588,474,423


Other Assets, Less Liabilities — (60.9)%			$	(601,458,684	)


Net Assets — 100.0%			$	987,015,739

The percentage shown for each investment category in the Portfolio of Investments is based on net assets.

At September 30, 2016, the concentration of the Fund’s investments in the various states and territories, determined as a percentage of total investments, is as follows:


New York			12.5%
Others, representing less than 10% individually			87.5%

The Fund invests primarily in debt securities issued by municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic developments, at September 30, 2016, 35.7% of total investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial institutions and financial guaranty assurance agencies. The aggregate percentage insured by an individual financial institution or financial guaranty assurance agency ranged from 0.2% to 12.6% of total investments.

⁽¹⁾	Security represents the municipal bond held by a trust that issues residual interest bonds (see Note 1G).


		12		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Futures Contracts
Description	Contracts		Position		Expiration Month/Year		Aggregate Cost			Value			Net Unrealized Appreciation

Interest Rate Futures
U.S. Long Treasury Bond		229		Short		Dec-16	$	(39,156,055	)	$	(38,507,781	)	$	648,274

													$	648,274

Abbreviations:


AGC	–	Assured Guaranty Corp.
AGM	–	Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.
AMBAC	–	AMBAC Financial Group, Inc.
BAM	–	Build America Mutual Assurance Co.
BHAC	–	Berkshire Hathaway Assurance Corp.


FGIC	–	Financial Guaranty Insurance Company
NPFG	–	National Public Finance Guaranty Corp.
PSF	–	Permanent School Fund
XLCA	–	XL Capital Assurance, Inc.


		13		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

California Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments


Tax-Exempt Investments — 169.9%


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Education — 12.9%
California Educational Facilities Authority, (California Institute of Technology), Prerefunded to 11/1/19, 5.00%, 11/1/39⁽¹⁾	$	10,000	$	11,258,600
California Educational Facilities Authority, (Claremont McKenna College), 5.00%, 1/1/27		770		808,631
California Educational Facilities Authority, (Harvey Mudd College), 5.25%, 12/1/31		550		651,409
California Educational Facilities Authority, (Harvey Mudd College), 5.25%, 12/1/36		940		1,113,317
California Educational Facilities Authority, (Loyola Marymount University), 5.00%, 10/1/30		1,375		1,522,304
California Educational Facilities Authority, (Santa Clara University), 5.00%, 2/1/29		285		317,786
California Educational Facilities Authority, (University of San Francisco), 6.125%, 10/1/36		650		798,246
California Educational Facilities Authority, (University of Southern California), Prerefunded to 10/1/18, 5.25%, 10/1/39		6,200		6,750,994
California Educational Facilities Authority, (University of the Pacific), 5.00%, 11/1/30		1,790		2,079,139
California Municipal Finance Authority, (University of San Diego), 5.00%, 10/1/31		1,175		1,369,415
California Municipal Finance Authority, (University of San Diego), 5.00%, 10/1/35		800		933,624
California Municipal Finance Authority, (University of San Diego), 5.25%, 10/1/26		2,270		2,694,149
California Municipal Finance Authority, (University of San Diego), 5.25%, 10/1/27		2,395		2,820,927
California Municipal Finance Authority, (University of San Diego), 5.25%, 10/1/28		2,520		2,952,256

			$	36,070,797


Electric Utilities — 1.3%
Southern California Public Power Authority, (Tieton Hydropower), 5.00%, 7/1/35	$	1,890	$	2,142,693
Vernon, Electric System Revenue, 5.125%, 8/1/21		1,420		1,571,699

			$	3,714,392


Escrowed / Prerefunded — 2.8%
California Educational Facilities Authority, (Claremont McKenna College), Prerefunded to 1/1/18, 5.00%, 1/1/27	$	1,910	$	2,009,644
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, (Election of 2004), Prerefunded to 8/1/17, 5.00%, 8/1/35		5,000		5,176,500
Vernon, Electric System Revenue, Prerefunded to 8/1/19, 5.125%, 8/1/21		610		663,241

			$	7,849,385


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


General Obligations — 48.4%
Burbank Unified School District, (Election of 2013), 4.00%, 8/1/31⁽¹⁾	$	6,900	$	7,688,739
California, 5.50%, 11/1/35		4,600		5,388,026
Contra Costa Community College District, (Election of 2006), 5.00%, 8/1/38		20		24,127
Contra Costa Community College District, (Election of 2006), 5.00%, 8/1/38⁽¹⁾		9,750		11,762,107
Desert Community College District, 5.00%, 8/1/37⁽¹⁾		7,500		9,199,500
Foothill-De Anza Community College District, Prerefunded to 8/1/21, 5.00%, 8/1/36⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,619,900
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 5.00%, 9/1/26		1,250		1,652,713
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 5.00%, 9/1/28		465		603,863
Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, 5.00%, 9/1/30		300		383,712
Mountain View Whisman School District, (Election of 2012), 4.00%, 9/1/42⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,235,600
Palo Alto, (Election of 2008), 5.00%, 8/1/40⁽¹⁾		7,020		8,004,555
Palomar Community College District, 5.00%, 8/1/44⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,058,700
San Bernardino Community College District, 4.00%, 8/1/27⁽¹⁾		5,775		6,618,670
San Diego Community College District, (Election of 2002), 5.00%, 8/1/32		1,375		1,600,528
San Diego Community College District, (Election of 2006), 5.00%, 8/1/31		2,545		2,968,895
San Jose Unified School District, 5.00%, 8/1/32⁽¹⁾		7,500		9,286,500
San Jose-Evergreen Community College District, (Election of 2010), 5.00%, 8/1/37⁽¹⁾		4,975		5,936,269
Santa Monica Community College District, (Election of 2008), 5.00%, 8/1/44⁽¹⁾		7,500		8,991,825
Southwestern Community College District, 5.00%, 8/1/29		940		1,201,254
Torrance Unified School District, (Election of 2008), 5.00%, 8/1/35		7,500		9,047,775
Ventura County Community College District, 5.00%, 8/1/30⁽¹⁾		8,000		9,993,600

			$	135,266,858


Hospital — 12.1%
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (Catholic Healthcare West), 5.25%, 3/1/27	$	1,750	$	2,045,295
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (Catholic Healthcare West), 5.25%, 3/1/28		550		636,905
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (Cedars-Sinai Medical Center), 5.00%, 8/15/39		4,505		4,972,484
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (City of Hope), 5.00%, 11/15/32		1,795		2,136,427
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (City of Hope), 5.00%, 11/15/35		2,565		3,038,140
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (St. Joseph Health System), 5.00%, 7/1/33		4,480		5,290,746


		14		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

California Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Hospital (continued)
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (St. Joseph Health System), 5.00%, 7/1/37	$	2,100	$	2,462,712
California Health Facilities Financing Authority, (Sutter Health), 5.25%, 8/15/31⁽¹⁾		5,000		5,956,000
Torrance, (Torrance Memorial Medical Center), 5.50%, 6/1/31		3,950		4,010,514
Washington Township Health Care District, 5.00%, 7/1/32		3,165		3,235,358

			$	33,784,581


Insured – Electric Utilities — 11.6%
Anaheim Public Financing Authority, (Electric System District), (BHAC), (NPFG), Prerefunded to 4/1/17, 4.50%, 10/1/32⁽¹⁾	$	20,000	$	20,374,199
Northern California Power Agency, (Hydroelectric), (AGC), 5.00%, 7/1/24		2,000		2,139,720
Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, (NPFG), 5.25%, 7/1/34		3,840		4,212,058
Sacramento Municipal Utility District, (AGM), 5.00%, 8/15/27		615		661,863
Sacramento Municipal Utility District, (AMBAC), (BHAC), 5.25%, 7/1/24		4,000		4,992,880

			$	32,380,720


Insured – Escrowed / Prerefunded — 12.9%
Antelope Valley Community College District, (Election of 2004), (NPFG), Prerefunded to 8/1/17, 5.25%, 8/1/39	$	4,175	$	4,332,857
California Statewide Communities Development Authority, (Sutter Health), (AMBAC), (BHAC), Prerefunded to 5/15/17, 5.00%, 11/15/38⁽¹⁾		2,000		2,053,460
East Bay Municipal Utility District, Water System Revenue, (AGM), (FGIC), Prerefunded to 6/1/17, 5.00%, 6/1/32		345		354,874
Glendale, Electric System Revenue, (AGC), Prerefunded to 2/1/18, 5.00%, 2/1/31		2,240		2,365,485
Palm Springs Unified School District, (Election of 2008), (AGC), Prerefunded to 8/1/19, 5.00%, 8/1/33		4,500		5,021,055
Riverside Community College District, (Election of 2004), (AGM), (NPFG), Prerefunded to 8/1/17, 5.00%, 8/1/32		5,705		5,908,839
Sacramento Municipal Utility District, (AGM), Prerefunded to 8/15/18, 5.00%, 8/15/27		385		415,122
San Diego County Water Authority, Certificates of Participation, (AGM), Prerefunded to 5/1/18, 5.00%, 5/1/38⁽¹⁾		10,000		10,663,600
San Luis Obispo County, (Nacimiento Water Project), (BHAC), (NPFG), Prerefunded to 9/1/17, 5.00%, 9/1/38		4,750		4,935,250

			$	36,050,542


Insured – General Obligations — 11.6%
Burbank Unified School District, (Election of 1997), (NPFG), 0.00%, 8/1/21	$	4,135	$	3,870,443


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Insured – General Obligations (continued)
San Diego Unified School District, (NPFG), 0.00%, 7/1/22	$	2,300	$	2,080,074
San Diego Unified School District, (NPFG), 0.00%, 7/1/23		5,000		4,415,400
San Juan Unified School District, (AGM), 0.00%, 8/1/21		5,630		5,259,715
San Mateo County Community College District, (NPFG), 0.00%, 9/1/22		4,840		4,443,701
San Mateo County Community College District, (NPFG), 0.00%, 9/1/23		4,365		3,905,234
San Mateo County Community College District, (NPFG), 0.00%, 9/1/25		3,955		3,383,225
San Mateo Union High School District, (NPFG), 0.00%, 9/1/21		5,240		4,887,977

			$	32,245,769


Insured – Hospital — 3.7%
California Statewide Communities Development Authority, (Kaiser Permanente), (BHAC), 5.00%, 4/1/31⁽¹⁾	$	10,000	$	10,193,000

			$	10,193,000


Insured – Special Tax Revenue — 6.1%
Hesperia Public Financing Authority, (Redevelopment and Housing Projects), (XLCA), 5.00%, 9/1/31	$	595	$	605,591
Hesperia Public Financing Authority, (Redevelopment and Housing Projects), (XLCA), 5.00%, 9/1/37		7,240		7,348,383
Pomona Public Financing Authority, (NPFG), 5.00%, 2/1/33		5,940		5,961,503
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., (NPFG), 0.00%, 8/1/45		15,020		3,033,589

			$	16,949,066


Insured – Transportation — 1.4%
San Jose, Airport Revenue, (AMBAC), 5.00%, 3/1/33	$	1,885	$	1,917,045
San Jose, Airport Revenue, (AMBAC), 5.00%, 3/1/37		2,040		2,074,170

			$	3,991,215


Insured – Water and Sewer — 1.7%
Riverside, Water System Revenue, (AGM), 5.00%, 10/1/38	$	1,595	$	1,724,929
San Luis Obispo County, (Nacimiento Water Project), (BHAC), (NPFG), 5.00%, 9/1/38		250		259,417
San Luis Obispo County, (Nacimiento Water Project), (NPFG), 4.50%, 9/1/40		2,750		2,837,670

			$	4,822,016


Lease Revenue / Certificates of Participation — 1.1%
California Public Works Board, 5.00%, 11/1/38	$	2,565	$	3,078,513

			$	3,078,513


		15		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

California Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Other Revenue — 0.3%
California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, (The Scripps Research Institute), 5.00%, 7/1/24	$	250	$	315,063
California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, (The Scripps Research Institute), 5.00%, 7/1/26		470		606,403

			$	921,466


Special Tax Revenue — 10.5%
Jurupa Public Financing Authority, 5.00%, 9/1/30	$	625	$	751,038
Jurupa Public Financing Authority, 5.00%, 9/1/32		625		743,538
Riverside County Transportation Commission, Sales Tax Revenue, 5.25%, 6/1/39⁽¹⁾		6,285		7,659,458
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, 5.25%, 3/1/40		5		6,073
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, 5.25%, 3/1/40⁽¹⁾		10,375		12,601,371
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transportation District, Sales Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 7/1/36⁽¹⁾		6,250		7,481,750

			$	29,243,228


Transportation — 11.3%
Bay Area Toll Authority, Toll Bridge Revenue, (San Francisco Bay Area), Prerefunded to 4/1/19, 5.25%, 4/1/29⁽¹⁾	$	6,500	$	7,206,745
Long Beach, Harbor Revenue, 5.00%, 5/15/27		1,960		2,243,044
Long Beach, Harbor Revenue, 5.00%, 5/15/42⁽¹⁾		7,500		9,075,825
Los Angeles Department of Airports, (Los Angeles International Airport), 5.00%, 5/15/35⁽¹⁾		7,500		8,547,825
San Francisco City and County Airport Commission, (San Francisco International Airport), 5.00%, 5/1/35		2,190		2,460,991
San Jose, Airport Revenue, 5.00%, 3/1/31		1,750		1,991,132

			$	31,525,562


Water and Sewer — 20.2%
Beverly Hills Public Financing Authority, Water Revenue, 5.00%, 6/1/37⁽¹⁾	$	5,725	$	6,810,059
El Dorado Irrigation District, 5.00%, 3/1/30⁽²⁾		2,500		3,144,800
El Dorado Irrigation District, 5.00%, 3/1/36⁽²⁾		4,750		5,815,283
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Water System Revenue, 5.00%, 7/1/39⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,009,100
Los Angeles, Wastewater System Revenue, 5.00%, 6/1/43⁽¹⁾		7,500		8,939,400
Orange County, Sanitation District Wastewater Revenue, 5.00%, 2/1/35⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,361,700


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Water and Sewer (continued)
Rancho California Water District Financing Authority, 5.00%, 8/1/46⁽²⁾	$	6,060	$	7,426,712

			$	56,507,054


Total Tax-Exempt Investments — 169.9% (identified cost $434,967,788)			$	474,594,164


Other Assets, Less Liabilities — (69.9)%			$	(195,313,651	)


Net Assets — 100.0%			$	279,280,513

The percentage shown for each investment category in the Portfolio of Investments is based on net assets.

The Fund invests primarily in debt securities issued by California municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic developments, at September 30, 2016, 28.8% of total investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial institutions and financial guaranty assurance agencies. The aggregate percentage insured by an individual financial institution or financial guaranty assurance agency ranged from 0.1% to 16.6% of total investments.

⁽¹⁾	Security represents the municipal bond held by a trust that issues residual interest bonds (see Note 1G).

⁽²⁾	When-issued security.


		16		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

California Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Futures Contracts
Description	Contracts		Position		Expiration Month/Year		Aggregate Cost			Value			Net Unrealized Appreciation

Interest Rate Futures
U.S. 10-Year Treasury Note		100		Short		Dec-16	$	(13,124,812	)	$	(13,112,500	)	$	12,312
U.S. Long Treasury Bond		79		Short		Dec-16		(13,507,984	)		(13,284,344	)		223,640

													$	235,952

Abbreviations:


AGC	–	Assured Guaranty Corp.
AGM	–	Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.
AMBAC	–	AMBAC Financial Group, Inc.
BHAC	–	Berkshire Hathaway Assurance Corp.


FGIC	–	Financial Guaranty Insurance Company
NPFG	–	National Public Finance Guaranty Corp.
XLCA	–	XL Capital Assurance, Inc.


		17		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

New York Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments


Tax-Exempt Investments — 162.5%


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Bond Bank — 1.7%
New York Environmental Facilities Corp., 5.00%, 10/15/39	$	3,360	$	3,785,006

			$	3,785,006


Education — 28.5%
Geneva Development Corp., (Hobart and William Smith Colleges), 5.00%, 9/1/30	$	200	$	236,322
Geneva Development Corp., (Hobart and William Smith Colleges), 5.00%, 9/1/33		105		122,891
Geneva Development Corp., (Hobart and William Smith Colleges), 5.00%, 9/1/34		200		233,382
Geneva Development Corp., (Hobart and William Smith Colleges), Series 2012, 5.00%, 9/1/32		1,330		1,566,301
Geneva Development Corp., (Hobart and William Smith Colleges), Series 2014, 5.00%, 9/1/32		200		234,636
Hempstead Local Development Corp., (Adelphi University), 5.00%, 6/1/20		760		858,823
Hempstead Local Development Corp., (Adelphi University), 5.00%, 6/1/21		950		1,097,525
Hempstead Local Development Corp., (Adelphi University), 5.00%, 6/1/31		800		914,656
Hempstead Local Development Corp., (Adelphi University), 5.00%, 6/1/32		300		342,996
Monroe County Industrial Development Corp., (St. John Fisher College), 5.00%, 6/1/23		405		473,417
New York City Cultural Resource Trust, (The Juilliard School), 5.00%, 1/1/39		240		261,497
New York City Cultural Resource Trust, (The Juilliard School), 5.00%, 1/1/39⁽¹⁾		10,000		10,895,700
New York Dormitory Authority, (Columbia University), 5.00%, 10/1/41⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,651,300
New York Dormitory Authority, (Cornell University), 5.00%, 7/1/37⁽¹⁾		5,700		6,500,337
New York Dormitory Authority, (New York University), 5.00%, 7/1/39⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,041,600
New York Dormitory Authority, (Rochester Institute of Technology), 5.00%, 7/1/40		2,000		2,260,340
New York Dormitory Authority, (Rockefeller University), 5.00%, 7/1/40		500		554,960
New York Dormitory Authority, (Rockefeller University), 5.00%, 7/1/40⁽¹⁾		2,700		2,996,784
New York Dormitory Authority, (Skidmore College), 5.00%, 7/1/26		1,175		1,369,133
New York Dormitory Authority, (Skidmore College), 5.25%, 7/1/30		250		293,853
New York Dormitory Authority, (The New School), 5.50%, 7/1/40		5,250		6,028,995


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Education (continued)
Onondaga County Cultural Resources Trust, (Syracuse University), 5.00%, 12/1/38	$	3,305	$	3,973,866

			$	63,909,314


Electric Utilities — 1.6%
Utility Debt Securitization Authority, 5.00%, 12/15/33	$	2,895	$	3,527,326

			$	3,527,326


Escrowed / Prerefunded — 0.9%
New York Dormitory Authority, (North Shore-Long Island Jewish Obligated Group), Prerefunded to 5/1/17, 5.00%, 5/1/26	$	2,055	$	2,106,149

			$	2,106,149


General Obligations — 11.2%
Long Beach City School District, 4.50%, 5/1/26	$	4,715	$	5,233,791
New York, 5.00%, 2/15/34⁽¹⁾		7,250		8,432,475
New York City, 5.00%, 8/1/34⁽¹⁾		8,650		10,361,230
Peekskill, 5.00%, 6/1/35		465		495,174
Peekskill, 5.00%, 6/1/36		490		521,796

			$	25,044,466


Hospital — 10.3%
Dutchess County Local Development Corp., (Health Quest Systems, Inc.), 4.00%, 7/1/41	$	1,895	$	2,065,019
New York Dormitory Authority, (Highland Hospital of Rochester), 5.00%, 7/1/26		620		696,235
New York Dormitory Authority, (Highland Hospital of Rochester), 5.20%, 7/1/32		820		914,702
New York Dormitory Authority, (Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center), 4.375%, 7/1/34⁽¹⁾		9,325		10,214,046
New York Dormitory Authority, (North Shore-Long Island Jewish Obligated Group), 5.00%, 5/1/20		1,065		1,207,635
Suffolk County Economic Development Corp., (Catholic Health Services of Long Island Obligated Group), 5.00%, 7/1/28		5,890		6,668,599
Suffolk County Economic Development Corp., (Catholic Health Services of Long Island Obligated Group), Prerefunded to 7/1/21, 5.00%, 7/1/28		1,010		1,194,729

			$	22,960,965


Housing — 3.2%
New York Housing Development Corp., 4.95%, 11/1/39	$	2,500	$	2,615,300
New York Housing Finance Agency, (FHLMC), (FNMA), (GNMA), 3.20%, 11/1/46		3,500		3,446,660
New York Mortgage Agency, 3.55%, 10/1/33		995		1,034,292

			$	7,096,252


		18		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

New York Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Industrial Development Revenue — 1.2%
New York Liberty Development Corp., (Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.), 5.25%, 10/1/35	$	490	$	656,463
New York Liberty Development Corp., (Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.), 5.50%, 10/1/37		1,440		1,995,177

			$	2,651,640


Insured – Education — 8.6%
New York Dormitory Authority, (City University), (AMBAC), 5.50%, 7/1/35	$	925	$	1,279,136
New York Dormitory Authority, (Educational Housing Services CUNY Student Housing), (AMBAC), 5.25%, 7/1/23		1,750		2,096,570
New York Dormitory Authority, (Pratt Institute), (AGC), Prerefunded to 7/1/19, 5.00%, 7/1/34		1,555		1,729,518
New York Dormitory Authority, (Pratt Institute), (AGC), Prerefunded to 7/1/19, 5.125%, 7/1/39		2,405		2,683,066
New York Dormitory Authority, (St. John’s University), (NPFG), Prerefunded to 7/1/17, 5.25%, 7/1/37		3,750		3,876,263
Oneida County Industrial Development Agency, (Hamilton College), (NPFG), 0.00%, 7/1/34		5,555		2,511,804
Oneida County Industrial Development Agency, (Hamilton College), (NPFG), 0.00%, 7/1/36		8,455		3,480,670
Oneida County Industrial Development Agency, (Hamilton College), (NPFG), 0.00%, 7/1/37		4,000		1,572,480

			$	19,229,507


Insured – Electric Utilities — 5.8%
Long Island Power Authority, Electric System Revenue, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 4/1/19, 5.75%, 4/1/33	$	5,000	$	5,593,500
New York Power Authority, (BHAC), (NPFG), 4.50%, 11/15/47⁽¹⁾		7,210		7,500,563

			$	13,094,063


Insured – Escrowed / Prerefunded — 4.7%
Eastchester Union Free School District, (AGM), Prerefunded to 6/15/18, 4.00%, 6/15/23	$	175	$	184,448
Freeport, (AGC), Prerefunded to 10/15/18, 5.00%, 10/15/20		185		200,779
Freeport, (AGC), Prerefunded to 10/15/18, 5.00%, 10/15/21		195		211,632
Nassau County Sewer and Storm Water Finance Authority, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 11/1/18, 5.125%, 11/1/23		300		327,168
Nassau County Sewer and Storm Water Finance Authority, (BHAC), Prerefunded to 11/1/18, 5.375%, 11/1/28		3,835		4,202,125
Wantagh Union Free School District, (AGC), Prerefunded to 11/15/17, 4.50%, 11/15/19		785		817,978
Wantagh Union Free School District, (AGC), Prerefunded to 11/15/17, 4.50%, 11/15/20		825		859,658


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Insured – Escrowed / Prerefunded (continued)
Wantagh Union Free School District, (AGC), Prerefunded to 11/15/17, 4.75%, 11/15/22	$	905	$	945,553
Wantagh Union Free School District, (AGC), Prerefunded to 11/15/17, 4.75%, 11/15/23		950		992,569
William Floyd Union Free School District, (AGC), Prerefunded to 12/15/20, 4.00%, 12/15/24		1,590		1,787,303

			$	10,529,213


Insured – General Obligations — 6.3%
Brentwood Union Free School District, (AGC), 4.75%, 11/15/23	$	2,290	$	2,540,251
Brentwood Union Free School District, (AGC), 5.00%, 11/15/24		2,390		2,677,302
East Northport Fire District, (AGC), 4.50%, 11/1/20		200		216,246
East Northport Fire District, (AGC), 4.50%, 11/1/21		200		216,146
East Northport Fire District, (AGC), 4.50%, 11/1/22		200		216,130
East Northport Fire District, (AGC), 4.50%, 11/1/23		200		215,920
Hoosic Valley Central School District, (AGC), 4.00%, 6/15/23		1,110		1,206,814
Longwood Central School District, Suffolk County, (AGC), 4.15%, 6/1/23		820		861,025
Longwood Central School District, Suffolk County, (AGC), 4.25%, 6/1/24		860		904,557
Oyster Bay, (AGM), 4.00%, 8/1/28		4,585		5,020,758

			$	14,075,149


Insured – Hospital — 2.0%
New York Dormitory Authority, (Hudson Valley Hospital Center), (AGM), (BHAC), 5.00%, 8/15/36	$	4,355	$	4,510,430

			$	4,510,430


Insured – Lease Revenue / Certificates of Participation — 2.5%
Ulster County Resource Recovery Agency, Solid Waste System, (AMBAC), 0.00%, 3/1/21	$	1,490	$	1,399,378
Ulster County Resource Recovery Agency, Solid Waste System, (AMBAC), 0.00%, 3/1/23		1,090		983,910
Ulster County Resource Recovery Agency, Solid Waste System, (AMBAC), 0.00%, 3/1/25		3,635		3,137,296

			$	5,520,584


Insured – Other Revenue — 2.0%
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, (BHAC), 5.50%, 7/15/38	$	4,050	$	4,383,477

			$	4,383,477


		19		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

New York Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Insured – Special Tax Revenue — 2.1%
New York Thruway Authority, Miscellaneous Tax Revenue, (AMBAC), 5.50%, 4/1/20	$	2,175	$	2,521,260
Puerto Rico Infrastructure Financing Authority, (AMBAC), 0.00%, 7/1/36		3,000		916,380
Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp., (NPFG), 0.00%, 8/1/45		6,705		1,354,209

			$	4,791,849


Other Revenue — 11.4%
Battery Park City Authority, 5.00%, 11/1/34	$	4,925	$	5,552,888
Brooklyn Arena Local Development Corp., (Barclays Center), 0.00%, 7/15/31		4,900		2,813,972
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, (Building Aid), 5.00%, 7/15/32⁽¹⁾		10,000		12,262,700
New York Liberty Development Corp., (7 World Trade Center), 5.00%, 9/15/32		4,110		4,887,283

			$	25,516,843


Special Tax Revenue — 26.9%
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Dedicated Tax Fund, 5.00%, 11/15/31⁽¹⁾	$	10,000	$	12,112,500
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, Future Tax Revenue, 3.00%, 2/1/39⁽¹⁾		3,250		3,298,815
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, Future Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 2/1/35⁽¹⁾		10,000		11,557,900
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, Future Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 8/1/36		2,000		2,461,000
New York City Transitional Finance Authority, Future Tax Revenue, 5.50%, 11/1/35⁽¹⁾⁽²⁾		1,000		1,177,000
New York Dormitory Authority, Personal Income Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 6/15/31⁽¹⁾		6,500		7,822,295
New York Dormitory Authority, Sales Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 3/15/34		6,600		7,864,494
New York Thruway Authority, Miscellaneous Tax Revenue, 5.00%, 4/1/26		2,370		2,689,168
Sales Tax Asset Receivables Corp., 5.00%, 10/15/30⁽¹⁾		8,900		11,213,021

			$	60,196,193


Transportation — 18.4%
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 5.25%, 11/15/38	$	3,430	$	4,079,882
Nassau County Bridge Authority, 5.00%, 10/1/35		1,565		1,751,783
Nassau County Bridge Authority, 5.00%, 10/1/40		300		334,212
New York Thruway Authority, 5.00%, 1/1/37		7,280		8,458,268
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 5.00%, 10/15/35⁽¹⁾		8,000		9,790,720


Security	Principal Amount (000’s omitted)		Value


Transportation (continued)
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, 5.00%, 10/15/41⁽¹⁾	$	5,000	$	6,064,500
Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, 5.00%, 11/15/38⁽¹⁾		10,000		10,828,100

			$	41,307,465


Water and Sewer — 13.2%
Albany Municipal Water Finance Authority, 5.00%, 12/1/26	$	755	$	885,502
Albany Municipal Water Finance Authority, 5.00%, 12/1/29		500		588,335
New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, (Water and Sewer System), 5.00%, 6/15/34		1,000		1,185,960
New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, (Water and Sewer System), 5.00%, 6/15/44⁽¹⁾		8,750		10,137,750
New York Environmental Facilities Corp., Clean Water and Drinking Water, 4.00%, 6/15/46⁽¹⁾		15,000		16,763,850

			$	29,561,397


Total Tax-Exempt Investments — 162.5% (identified cost $332,539,464)			$	363,797,288


Other Assets, Less Liabilities — (62.5)%			$	(139,987,540	)


Net Assets — 100.0%			$	223,809,748

The percentage shown for each investment category in the Portfolio of Investments is based on net assets.

The Fund invests primarily in debt securities issued by New York municipalities. The ability of the issuers of the debt securities to meet their obligations may be affected by economic developments in a specific industry or municipality. In order to reduce the risk associated with such economic developments, at September 30, 2016, 20.9% of total investments are backed by bond insurance of various financial institutions and financial guaranty assurance agencies. The aggregate percentage insured by an individual financial institution or financial guaranty assurance agency ranged from 2.7% to 7.3% of total investments.

⁽¹⁾	Security represents the municipal bond held by a trust that issues residual interest bonds (see Note 1G).

⁽²⁾	Security (or a portion thereof) has been pledged as collateral for residual interest bond transactions. The aggregate value of such collateral is $427,000.


		20		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

New York Municipal Bond Fund

September 30, 2016

Portfolio of Investments — continued


Futures Contracts
Description	Contracts		Position		Expiration Month/Year		Aggregate Cost			Value			Net Unrealized Appreciation

Interest Rate Futures
U.S. Long Treasury Bond		50		Short		Dec-16	$	(8,549,357	)	$	(8,407,812	)	$	141,545

													$	141,545

Abbreviations:


AGC	–	Assured Guaranty Corp.
AGM	–	Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp.
AMBAC	–	AMBAC Financial Group, Inc.
BHAC	–	Berkshire Hathaway Assurance Corp.


FHLMC	–	Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp.
FNMA	–	Federal National Mortgage Association
GNMA	–	Government National Mortgage Association
NPFG	–	National Public Finance Guaranty Corp.


		21		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Statements of Assets and Liabilities


	September 30, 2016
Assets	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund
Investments —
Identified cost	$	1,427,514,200		$	434,967,788		$	332,539,464
Unrealized appreciation		160,960,223			39,626,376			31,257,824
Investments, at value	$	1,588,474,423		$	474,594,164		$	363,797,288
Cash	$	—		$	10,331,832		$	—
Restricted cash*		928,000			462,000			205,000
Interest receivable		19,274,433			4,897,628			4,425,077
Receivable for variation margin on open financial futures contracts		336,344			158,219			73,438
Receivable from the transfer agent		—			9,905			20,821
Deferred debt issuance costs		296,738			92,512			19,681
Total assets	$	1,609,309,938		$	490,546,260		$	368,541,305

Liabilities
Payable for floating rate notes issued	$	616,440,000		$	193,880,000		$	143,090,000
Payable for when-issued securities		—			16,327,481			—
Due to custodian		2,420,677			—			824,024
Payable to affiliate:
Investment adviser fee		791,614			233,756			195,956
Interest expense and fees payable		2,264,149			640,956			465,429
Accrued expenses		377,759			183,554			156,148
Total liabilities	$	622,294,199		$	211,265,747		$	144,731,557
Net Assets	$	987,015,739		$	279,280,513		$	223,809,748

Sources of Net Assets
Common shares, $0.01 par value, unlimited number of shares authorized	$	681,683		$	213,943		$	156,618
Additional paid-in capital		951,295,647			302,268,737			221,068,839
Accumulated net realized loss		(126,570,088	)		(64,347,694	)		(29,936,176	)
Accumulated undistributed net investment income		—			1,283,199			1,121,098
Net unrealized appreciation		161,608,497			39,862,328			31,399,369
Net Assets	$	987,015,739		$	279,280,513		$	223,809,748

Common Shares Outstanding		68,168,250			21,394,348			15,661,780

Net Asset Value
Net assets ÷ common shares issued and outstanding	$	14.48		$	13.05		$	14.29

*	Represents restricted cash on deposit at the broker for open financial futures contracts.


		22		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Statements of Operations


	Year Ended September 30, 2016
Investment Income	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund
Interest	$	63,511,526		$	18,375,386		$	14,244,912
Total investment income	$	63,511,526		$	18,375,386		$	14,244,912

Expenses
Investment adviser fee	$	9,497,157		$	2,814,035		$	2,366,224
Trustees’ fees and expenses		68,000			25,438			19,871
Custodian fee		339,411			130,944			93,486
Transfer and dividend disbursing agent fees		17,942			17,967			17,982
Legal and accounting services		147,593			96,550			88,594
Printing and postage		68,519			18,238			17,585
Interest expense and fees		5,188,617			1,620,423			1,188,138
Miscellaneous		75,893			33,216			31,730
Total expenses	$	15,403,132		$	4,756,811		$	3,823,610

Net investment income	$	48,108,394		$	13,618,575		$	10,421,302

Realized and Unrealized Gain (Loss)
Net realized gain (loss) —
Investment transactions	$	18,333,384		$	2,199,794		$	2,681,013
Extinguishment of debt		(806	)		(8,986	)		(5	)
Financial futures contracts		(5,040,888	)		(2,327,201	)		(1,100,627	)
Net realized gain (loss)	$	13,291,690		$	(136,393	)	$	1,580,381
Change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) —
Investments	$	28,392,787		$	7,747,718		$	4,441,218
Financial futures contracts		1,290,978			595,359			281,873

Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation)	$	29,683,765		$	8,343,077		$	4,723,091

Net realized and unrealized gain	$	42,975,455		$	8,206,684		$	6,303,472

Net increase in net assets from operations	$	91,083,849		$	21,825,259		$	16,724,774


		23		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Statements of Changes in Net Assets


	Year Ended September 30, 2016
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund
From operations —
Net investment income	$	48,108,394		$	13,618,575		$	10,421,302
Net realized gain (loss) from investment transactions, extinguishment of debt and financial futures contracts		13,291,690			(136,393	)		1,580,381
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) from investments and financial futures contracts		29,683,765			8,343,077			4,723,091
Net increase in net assets from operations	$	91,083,849		$	21,825,259		$	16,724,774
Distributions to common shareholders —
From net investment income	$	(49,547,411	)	$	(14,631,864	)	$	(11,243,021	)
Total distributions to common shareholders	$	(49,547,411	)	$	(14,631,864	)	$	(11,243,021	)
Capital share transactions —
Reinvestment of distributions to common shareholders	$	—		$	41,840		$	46,018
Net increase in net assets from capital share transactions	$	—		$	41,840		$	46,018

Net increase in net assets	$	41,536,438		$	7,235,235		$	5,527,771

Net Assets
At beginning of year	$	945,479,301		$	272,045,278		$	218,281,977
At end of year	$	987,015,739		$	279,280,513		$	223,809,748

Accumulated undistributed net investment income included in net assets
At end of year	$	—		$	1,283,199		$	1,121,098


		24		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Statements of Changes in Net Assets — continued


	Year Ended September 30, 2015
Increase (Decrease) in Net Assets	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund
From operations —
Net investment income	$	51,778,676		$	14,719,842		$	11,207,002
Net realized gain (loss) from investment transactions, extinguishment of debt and financial futures contracts		(4,457,385	)		2,286,443			981,677
Net change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) from investments and financial futures contracts		(142,512	)		(6,262,877	)		(2,564,720	)
Net increase in net assets from operations	$	47,178,779		$	10,743,408		$	9,623,959
Distributions to common shareholders —
From net investment income	$	(52,218,244	)	$	(14,631,999	)	$	(11,244,698	)
Total distributions to common shareholders	$	(52,218,244	)	$	(14,631,999	)	$	(11,244,698	)
Capital share transactions —
Cost of shares repurchased (See Note 5)	$	—		$	(87,649	)	$	(287,318	)
Net decrease in net assets from capital share transactions	$	—		$	(87,649	)	$	(287,318	)

Net decrease in net assets	$	(5,039,465	)	$	(3,976,240	)	$	(1,908,057	)

Net Assets
At beginning of year	$	950,518,766		$	276,021,518		$	220,190,034
At end of year	$	945,479,301		$	272,045,278		$	218,281,977

Accumulated undistributed net investment income included in net assets
At end of year	$	1,467,917		$	2,250,747		$	1,878,214


		25		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Statements of Cash Flows


	Year Ended September 30, 2016
Cash Flows From Operating Activities	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund
Net increase in net assets from operations	$	91,083,849		$	21,825,259		$	16,724,774
Adjustments to reconcile net increase in net assets from operations to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Investments purchased		(285,788,465	)		(63,803,728	)		(49,687,821	)
Investments sold		275,661,626			62,183,743			38,757,265
Net amortization/accretion of premium (discount)		(1,969,432	)		(115,932	)		575,249
Amortization of deferred debt issuance costs		40,581			10,634			4,914
Decrease in restricted cash		—			26,000			—
Decrease (increase) in interest receivable		(292,186	)		266,698			(73,915	)
Increase in receivable for variation margin on open financial futures contracts		(207,532	)		(105,969	)		(45,313	)
Increase in receivable from the transfer agent		—			(9,905	)		(20,821	)
Increase in payable to affiliate for investment adviser fee		36,649			10,023			7,266
Increase in interest expense and fees payable		1,142,458			308,613			244,766
Increase in accrued expenses		162,048			61,285			39,595
Net change in unrealized (appreciation) depreciation from investments		(28,392,787	)		(7,747,718	)		(4,441,218	)
Net realized gain from investments		(18,333,384	)		(2,199,794	)		(2,681,013	)
Net realized loss on extinguishment of debt		806			8,986			5
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities	$	33,144,231		$	10,718,195		$	(596,267	)

Cash Flows From Financing Activities
Distributions paid to common shareholders, net of reinvestments	$	(49,547,411	)	$	(14,590,024	)	$	(11,197,003	)
Proceeds from secured borrowings		190,380,000			40,000,000			25,000,000
Repayment of secured borrowings		(161,595,000	)		(21,305,000	)		(17,335,000	)
Increase (decrease) in due to custodian		(12,381,820	)		(4,491,339	)		824,024
Net cash used in financing activities	$	(33,144,231	)	$	(386,363	)	$	(2,707,979	)

Net increase (decrease) in cash	$	—		$	10,331,832		$	(3,304,246	)

Cash at beginning of year	$	—		$	—		$	3,304,246

Cash at end of year	$	—		$	10,331,832		$	—

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
Noncash financing activities not included herein consist of:
Reinvestment of dividends and distributions	$	—		$	41,840		$	46,018
Cash paid for interest and fees		4,005,578			1,301,176			938,458


		26		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Financial Highlights


	Municipal Fund
	Year Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			2014			2013			2012
Net asset value — Beginning of year	$	13.870		$	13.940		$	12.290		$	14.100		$	12.560

Income (Loss) From Operations
Net investment income⁽¹⁾	$	0.706		$	0.760		$	0.783		$	0.768		$	0.763
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss)		0.631			(0.064	)		1.633			(1.812	)		1.584

Total income (loss) from operations	$	1.337		$	0.696		$	2.416		$	(1.044	)	$	2.347

Less Distributions
From net investment income	$	(0.727	)	$	(0.766	)	$	(0.766	)	$	(0.766	)	$	(0.807	)

Total distributions	$	(0.727	)	$	(0.766	)	$	(0.766	)	$	(0.766	)	$	(0.807	)

Net asset value — End of year	$	14.480		$	13.870		$	13.940		$	12.290		$	14.100

Market value — End of year	$	13.620		$	12.510		$	12.520		$	11.560		$	14.460

Total Investment Return on Net Asset Value⁽²⁾		10.19	%		5.69	%		21.00	%		(7.59	)%		19.33	%

Total Investment Return on Market Value⁽²⁾		14.91	%		6.14	%		15.44	%		(15.17	)%		24.45	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data
Net assets, end of year (000’s omitted)	$	987,016		$	945,479		$	950,519		$	837,447		$	960,528
Ratios (as a percentage of average daily net assets):
Expenses excluding interest and fees⁽³⁾		1.05	%		1.05	%		1.12	%		1.15	%		1.30	%
Interest and fee expense⁽⁴⁾		0.53	%		0.38	%		0.43	%		0.47	%		0.48	%
Total expenses⁽³⁾		1.58	%		1.43	%		1.55	%		1.62	%		1.78	%
Net investment income		4.92	%		5.43	%		6.01	%		5.67	%		5.75	%
Portfolio Turnover		18	%		5	%		9	%		18	%		17	%

⁽¹⁾	Computed using average shares outstanding.

⁽²⁾	Returns are historical and are calculated by determining the percentage change in net asset value or market value with all distributions reinvested. Distributions are assumed to be reinvested at prices obtained under the Fund’s dividend reinvestment plan.

⁽³⁾	Excludes the effect of custody fee credits, if any, of less than 0.005%. Effective September 1, 2015, custody fee credits, which were earned on cash deposit balances, were discontinued by the custodian.

⁽⁴⁾	Interest and fee expense relates to the liability for floating rate notes issued in conjunction with residual interest bond transactions (see Note 1G).


		27		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Financial Highlights — continued


	California Fund
	Year Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			2014			2013			2012
Net asset value — Beginning of year	$	12.720		$	12.900		$	11.510		$	12.980		$	11.740

Income (Loss) From Operations
Net investment income⁽¹⁾	$	0.637		$	0.688		$	0.700		$	0.698		$	0.689
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss)		0.377			(0.184	)		1.326			(1.514	)		1.282

Total income (loss) from operations	$	1.014		$	0.504		$	2.026		$	(0.816	)	$	1.971

Less Distributions
From net investment income	$	(0.684	)	$	(0.684	)	$	(0.657	)	$	(0.654	)	$	(0.731	)

Total distributions	$	(0.684	)	$	(0.684	)	$	(0.657	)	$	(0.654	)	$	(0.731	)

Anti-dilutive effect of share repurchase program (see Note 5)⁽¹⁾	$	—		$	0.000	⁽²⁾	$	0.021		$	—		$	—

Net asset value — End of year	$	13.050		$	12.720		$	12.900		$	11.510		$	12.980

Market value — End of year	$	13.560		$	11.630		$	11.350		$	10.330		$	12.650

Total Investment Return on Net Asset Value⁽³⁾		8.22	%		4.46	%		18.96	%		(6.18	)%		17.34	%

Total Investment Return on Market Value⁽³⁾		22.99	%		8.55	%		16.62	%		(13.60	)%		9.42	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data
Net assets, end of year (000’s omitted)	$	279,281		$	272,045		$	276,022		$	250,407		$	282,353
Ratios (as a percentage of average daily net assets):
Expenses excluding interest and fees⁽⁴⁾		1.13	%		1.11	%		1.16	%		1.22	%		1.25	%
Interest and fee expense⁽⁵⁾		0.58	%		0.40	%		0.42	%		0.46	%		0.48	%
Total expenses⁽⁴⁾		1.71	%		1.51	%		1.58	%		1.68	%		1.73	%
Net investment income		4.89	%		5.36	%		5.75	%		5.56	%		5.57	%
Portfolio Turnover		12	%		7	%		7	%		22	%		27	%

⁽¹⁾	Computed using average shares outstanding.

⁽²⁾	Amount is less than $0.0005.

⁽³⁾	Returns are historical and are calculated by determining the percentage change in net asset value or market value with all distributions reinvested. Distributions are assumed to be reinvested at prices obtained under the Fund’s dividend reinvestment plan.

⁽⁴⁾	Excludes the effect of custody fee credits, if any, of less than 0.005%. Effective September 1, 2015, custody fee credits, which were earned on cash deposit balances, were discontinued by the custodian.

⁽⁵⁾	Interest and fee expense relates to the liability for floating rate notes issued in conjunction with residual interest bond transactions (see Note 1G).


		28		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Financial Highlights — continued


	New York Fund
	Year Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			2014			2013			2012
Net asset value — Beginning of year	$	13.940		$	14.040		$	12.740		$	14.460		$	13.170

Income (Loss) From Operations
Net investment income⁽¹⁾	$	0.666		$	0.716		$	0.752		$	0.735		$	0.728
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss)		0.402			(0.100	)		1.219			(1.767	)		1.308

Total income (loss) from operations	$	1.068		$	0.616		$	1.971		$	(1.032	)	$	2.036

Less Distributions
From net investment income	$	(0.718	)	$	(0.718	)	$	(0.690	)	$	(0.688	)	$	(0.746	)

Total distributions	$	(0.718	)	$	(0.718	)	$	(0.690	)	$	(0.688	)	$	(0.746	)

Anti-dilutive effect of share repurchase program (see Note 5)⁽¹⁾	$	—		$	0.002		$	0.019		$	—		$	—

Net asset value — End of year	$	14.290		$	13.940		$	14.040		$	12.740		$	14.460

Market value — End of year	$	14.320		$	12.600		$	12.330		$	11.540		$	14.660

Total Investment Return on Net Asset Value⁽²⁾		8.01	%		5.07	%		16.72	%		(7.16	)%		15.87	%

Total Investment Return on Market Value⁽²⁾		19.75	%		8.14	%		13.16	%		(17.05	)%		15.03	%

Ratios/Supplemental Data
Net assets, end of year (000’s omitted)	$	223,810		$	218,282		$	220,190		$	202,452		$	229,792
Ratios (as a percentage of average daily net assets):
Expenses excluding interest and fees⁽³⁾		1.18	%		1.20	%		1.22	%		1.21	%		1.22	%
Interest and fee expense⁽⁴⁾		0.53	%		0.37	%		0.40	%		0.42	%		0.43	%
Total expenses⁽³⁾		1.71	%		1.57	%		1.62	%		1.63	%		1.65	%
Net investment income		4.66	%		5.11	%		5.65	%		5.29	%		5.29	%
Portfolio Turnover		11	%		5	%		7	%		12	%		17	%

⁽¹⁾	Computed using average shares outstanding.

⁽²⁾	Returns are historical and are calculated by determining the percentage change in net asset value or market value with all distributions reinvested. Distributions are assumed to be reinvested at prices obtained under the Fund’s dividend reinvestment plan.

⁽³⁾	Excludes the effect of custody fee credits, if any, of less than 0.005%. Effective September 1, 2015, custody fee credits, which were earned on cash deposit balances, were discontinued by the custodian.

⁽⁴⁾	Interest and fee expense relates to the liability for floating rate notes issued in conjunction with residual interest bond transactions (see Note 1G).


		29		See Notes to Financial Statements.

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements

1 Significant Accounting Policies

Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund, Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund and Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund, (each individually referred to as the Fund, and collectively, the Funds), are Massachusetts business trusts registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the 1940 Act), as non-diversified, closed-end management investment companies. The Funds’ investment objective is to provide current income exempt from regular federal income tax, including alternative minimum tax, and, in state specific funds, taxes in its specified state.

The following is a summary of significant accounting policies of the Funds. The policies are in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP). Each Fund is an investment company and follows accounting and reporting guidance in the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification Topic 946.

A Investment Valuation — The following methodologies are used to determine the market value or fair value of investments.

Debt Obligations. Debt obligations (including short-term obligations with a remaining maturity of more than sixty days) are generally valued on the basis of valuations provided by third party pricing services, as derived from such services’ pricing models. Inputs to the models may include, but are not limited to, reported trades, executable bid and asked prices, broker/dealer quotations, prices or yields of securities with similar characteristics, interest rates, anticipated prepayments, benchmark curves or information pertaining to the issuer, as well as industry and economic events. The pricing services may use a matrix approach, which considers information regarding securities with similar characteristics to determine the valuation for a security. Short-term obligations purchased with a remaining maturity of sixty days or less are generally valued at amortized cost, which approximates market value.

Derivatives. Financial futures contracts are valued at the closing settlement price established by the board of trade or exchange on which they are traded.

Fair Valuation. Investments for which valuations or market quotations are not readily available or are deemed unreliable are valued at fair value using methods determined in good faith by or at the direction of the Trustees of a Fund in a manner that fairly reflects the security’s value, or the amount that a Fund might reasonably expect to receive for the security upon its current sale in the ordinary course. Each such determination is based on a consideration of relevant factors, which are likely to vary from one pricing context to another. These factors may include, but are not limited to, the type of security, the existence of any contractual restrictions on the security’s disposition, the price and extent of public trading in similar securities of the issuer or of comparable entities, quotations or relevant information obtained from broker/dealers or other market participants, information obtained from the issuer, analysts, and/or the appropriate stock exchange (for exchange-traded securities), an analysis of the entity’s financial condition, and an evaluation of the forces that influence the issuer and the market(s) in which the security is purchased and sold.

B Investment Transactions and Related Income — Investment transactions for financial statement purposes are accounted for on a trade date basis. Realized gains and losses on investments sold are determined on the basis of identified cost. Interest income is recorded on the basis of interest accrued, adjusted for amortization of premium or accretion of discount.

C Federal Taxes — Each Fund’s policy is to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to regulated investment companies and to distribute to shareholders each year substantially all of its taxable, if any, and tax-exempt net investment income, and all or substantially all of its net realized capital gains. Accordingly, no provision for federal income or excise tax is necessary. Each Fund intends to satisfy conditions which will enable it to designate distributions from the interest income generated by its investments in non-taxable municipal securities, which are exempt from regular federal income tax when received by each Fund, as exempt-interest dividends.

As of September 30, 2016, the Funds had no uncertain tax positions that would require financial statement recognition, de-recognition, or disclosure. Each Fund files a U.S. federal income tax return annually after its fiscal year-end, which is subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service for a period of three years from the date of filing.

D Legal Fees — Legal fees and other related expenses incurred as part of negotiations of the terms and requirement of capital infusions, or that are expected to result in the restructuring of, or a plan of reorganization for, an investment are recorded as realized losses. Ongoing expenditures to protect or enhance an investment are treated as operating expenses.

E Use of Estimates — The preparation of the financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of income and expense during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

F Indemnifications — Under each Fund’s organizational documents, its officers and Trustees may be indemnified against certain liabilities and expenses arising out of the performance of their duties to each Fund. Under Massachusetts law, if certain conditions prevail, shareholders of a Massachusetts business trust (such as a Fund) could be deemed to have personal liability for the obligations of the Fund. However, each Fund’s Declaration of Trust contains an express disclaimer of liability on the part of Fund shareholders and the By-laws provide that the Fund shall assume the defense on behalf of any Fund shareholders. Moreover, the By-laws also provide for indemnification out of Fund property of any shareholder held personally liable solely by reason of being or having been a shareholder for all loss or expense arising from such liability. Additionally, in the normal course of business, each Fund enters into agreements with service providers that may contain indemnification clauses. Each Fund’s maximum exposure under these arrangements is unknown as this would involve future claims that may be made against each Fund that have not yet occurred.


		30

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements — continued

G Floating Rate Notes Issued in Conjunction with Securities Held — The Funds may invest in residual interest bonds, also referred to as inverse floating rate securities, whereby a Fund may sell a variable or fixed rate bond for cash to a Special-Purpose Vehicle (the SPV), (which is generally organized as a trust), while at the same time, buying a residual interest in the assets and cash flows of the SPV. The bond is deposited into the SPV with the same CUSIP number as the bond sold to the SPV by the Fund, and which may have been, but is not required to be, the bond purchased from the Fund (the Bond). The SPV also issues floating rate notes (Floating Rate Notes) which are sold to third-parties. The residual interest bond held by a Fund gives the Fund the right (1) to cause the holders of the Floating Rate Notes to generally tender their notes at par, and (2) to have the Bond held by the SPV transferred to the Fund, thereby terminating the SPV. Should the Fund exercise such right, it would generally pay the SPV the par amount due on the Floating Rate Notes and exchange the residual interest bond for the underlying Bond. Pursuant to generally accepted accounting principles for transfers and servicing of financial assets and extinguishment of liabilities, the Funds account for the transaction described above as a secured borrowing by including the Bond in their Portfolio of Investments and the Floating Rate Notes as a liability under the caption “Payable for floating rate notes issued” in their Statement of Assets and Liabilities. The Floating Rate Notes have interest rates that generally reset weekly and their holders have the option to tender their notes to the SPV for redemption at par at each reset date. Accordingly, the fair value of the payable for floating rate notes issued approximates its carrying value. If measured at fair value, the payable for floating rate notes would have been considered as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy (see Note 8) at September 30, 2016. Interest expense related to the Funds’ liability with respect to Floating Rate Notes is recorded as incurred. The SPV may be terminated by the Fund, as noted above, or by the occurrence of certain termination events as defined in the trust agreement, such as a downgrade in the credit quality of the underlying Bond, bankruptcy of or payment failure by the issuer of the underlying Bond, the inability to remarket Floating Rate Notes that have been tendered due to insufficient buyers in the market, or the failure by the SPV to obtain renewal of the liquidity agreement under which liquidity support is provided for the Floating Rate Notes up to one year. Structuring fees paid to the liquidity provider upon the creation of an SPV have been recorded as debt issuance costs and are being amortized as interest expense to the expected maturity of the related trust. Unamortized structuring fees related to a terminated SPV are recorded as a realized loss on extinguishment of debt. At September 30, 2016, the amounts of the Funds’ Floating Rate Notes and related interest rates and collateral were as follows:


	Municipal Fund		California Fund		New York Fund

Floating Rate Notes Outstanding	$	616,440,000	$	193,880,000	$	143,090,000
Interest Rate or Range of Interest Rates (%)		0.88 - 1.34		0.87 - 0.90		0.87 - 0.89
Collateral for Floating Rate Notes Outstanding	$	837,394,036	$	265,588,057	$	192,623,186

For the year ended September 30, 2016, the Funds’ average Floating Rate Notes outstanding and the average interest rate including fees and amortization of deferred debt issuance costs were as follows:


	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund

Average Floating Rate Notes Outstanding	$	606,796,899		$	191,031,052		$	141,875,724
Average Interest Rate		0.86	%		0.85	%		0.84	%

In certain circumstances, the Funds may enter into shortfall and forbearance agreements with brokers by which a Fund agrees to reimburse the broker for the difference between the liquidation value of the Bond held by the SPV and the liquidation value of the Floating Rate Notes, as well as any shortfalls in interest cash flows. The Funds had no shortfalls as of September 30, 2016.

The Funds may also purchase residual interest bonds in a secondary market transaction without first owning the underlying bond. Such transactions are not required to be treated as secured borrowings. Shortfall agreements, if any, related to residual interest bonds purchased in a secondary market transaction are disclosed in the Portfolio of Investments.

The Funds’ investment policies and restrictions expressly permit investments in residual interest bonds. Such bonds typically offer the potential for yields exceeding the yields available on fixed rate bonds with comparable credit quality and maturity. These securities tend to underperform the market for fixed rate bonds in a rising long-term interest rate environment, but tend to outperform the market for fixed rate bonds when long-term interest rates decline. The value and income of residual interest bonds are generally more volatile than that of a fixed rate bond. The Funds’ investment policies do not allow the Funds to borrow money except as permitted by the 1940 Act. Management believes that the Funds’ restrictions on borrowing money and issuing senior securities (other than as specifically permitted) do not apply to Floating Rate Notes issued by the SPV and included as a liability in the Funds’ Statement of Assets and Liabilities. As secured indebtedness issued by an SPV, Floating Rate Notes are distinct from the borrowings and senior securities to which the Funds’ restrictions apply. Residual interest bonds held by the Funds are securities exempt from registration under Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933.

Final rules implementing section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Volcker Rule”) prohibit banking entities from engaging in proprietary trading of certain instruments and limit such entities’ investments in, and relationships with, covered funds (such as SPVs), as


		31

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements — continued

defined in the rules. The compliance date for the Volcker Rule for certain covered funds was July 21, 2015 while for other covered funds the compliance date is July 21, 2017, as announced on July 7, 2016. The Volcker Rule precludes banking entities and their affiliates from (i) sponsoring residual interest bond programs and (ii) continuing relationships with or services for existing residual interest bond programs. As a result, residual interest bond trusts were restructured to comply with the Volcker Rule and all residual interest bonds held by the Funds at September 30, 2016 are Volcker Rule compliant. The effects of the Volcker Rule may make it more difficult for the Funds to maintain current or desired levels of leverage and may cause the Funds to incur additional expenses to maintain their leverage.

Legal and restructuring fees incurred in connection with the restructuring of residual interest bond trusts are recorded as interest expense.

H Financial Futures Contracts — Upon entering into a financial futures contract, a Fund is required to deposit with the broker, either in cash or securities, an amount equal to a certain percentage of the contract amount (initial margin). Subsequent payments, known as variation margin, are made or received by the Fund each business day, depending on the daily fluctuations in the value of the underlying security, and are recorded as unrealized gains or losses by the Fund. Gains (losses) are realized upon the expiration or closing of the financial futures contracts. Should market conditions change unexpectedly, the Fund may not achieve the anticipated benefits of the financial futures contracts and may realize a loss. Futures contracts have minimal counterparty risk as they are exchange traded and the clearinghouse for the exchange is substituted as the counterparty, guaranteeing counterparty performance.

I When-Issued Securities and Delayed Delivery Transactions — The Funds may purchase or sell securities on a delayed delivery or when-issued basis. Payment and delivery may take place after the customary settlement period for that security. At the time the transaction is negotiated, the price of the security that will be delivered is fixed. The Funds maintain cash and/or security positions for these commitments such that sufficient liquid assets will be available to make payments upon settlement. Securities purchased on a delayed delivery or when-issued basis are marked-to-market daily and begin earning interest on settlement date. Losses may arise due to changes in the market value of the underlying securities or if the counterparty does not perform under the contract.

J Statement of Cash Flows — The cash amount shown in the Statement of Cash Flows of a Fund is the amount included in the Fund’s Statement of Assets and Liabilities and represents the unrestricted cash on hand at its custodian and does not include any short-term investments.

2 Distributions to Shareholders and Income Tax Information

Each Fund intends to make monthly distributions of net investment income to common shareholders. In addition, at least annually, each Fund intends to distribute all or substantially all of its net realized capital gains (reduced by available capital loss carryforwards). Distributions are recorded on the ex-dividend date. Distributions to shareholders are determined in accordance with income tax regulations, which may differ from U.S. GAAP. As required by U.S. GAAP, only distributions in excess of tax basis earnings and profits are reported in the financial statements as a return of capital. Permanent differences between book and tax accounting relating to distributions are reclassified to paid-in capital. For tax purposes, distributions from short-term capital gains are considered to be from ordinary income.

The tax character of distributions declared for the years ended September 30, 2016 and September 30, 2015 was as follows:


	Year Ended September 30, 2016
	Municipal Fund		California Fund		New York Fund

Distributions declared from:
Tax-exempt income	$	49,546,972	$	14,551,701	$	11,153,560
Ordinary income	$	439	$	80,163	$	89,461


	Year Ended September 30, 2015
	Municipal Fund		California Fund		New York Fund

Distributions declared from:
Tax-exempt income	$	52,211,758	$	14,631,999	$	11,144,007
Ordinary income	$	6,486	$	—	$	100,691

During the year ended September 30, 2016, the following amounts were reclassified due to expired capital loss carryforwards, the tax treatment of distributions in excess of net tax-exempt income and differences between book and tax accounting, primarily for premium amortization and accretion of market discount.


		32

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements — continued


	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund

Change in:
Paid-in capital	$	(6,907,960	)	$	(533,889	)	$	—
Accumulated net realized loss	$	6,936,860		$	488,148		$	(64,603	)
Accumulated undistributed net investment income	$	(28,900	)	$	45,741		$	64,603

These reclassifications had no effect on the net assets or net asset value per share of the Funds.

As of September 30, 2016, the components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a tax basis were as follows:


	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund

Undistributed tax-exempt income	$	—		$	1,283,199		$	1,121,098
Capital loss carryforwards and deferred capital losses	$	(131,763,857	)	$	(64,083,820	)	$	(30,097,471	)
Net unrealized appreciation	$	166,802,266		$	39,598,454		$	31,560,664

The differences between components of distributable earnings (accumulated losses) on a tax basis and the amounts reflected in the Statements of Assets and Liabilities are primarily due to wash sales, residual interest bonds, futures contracts, premium amortization and accretion of market discount.

At September 30, 2016, the following Funds, for federal income tax purposes, had capital loss carryforwards and deferred capital losses which would reduce the respective Fund’s taxable income arising from future net realized gains on investment transactions, if any, to the extent permitted by the Internal Revenue Code, and thus would reduce the amount of distributions to shareholders, which would otherwise be necessary to relieve the Funds of any liability for federal income or excise tax. Under tax regulations, capital losses incurred in taxable years beginning after December 2010 are considered deferred capital losses and are treated as arising on the first day of a Fund’s next taxable year, retaining the same short-term or long-term character as when originally deferred. Deferred capital losses are required to be used prior to capital loss carryforwards, which carry an expiration date. As a result of this ordering rule, capital loss carryforwards may be more likely to expire unused. The amounts and expiration dates of the capital loss carryforwards, whose character is short-term, and the amounts of the deferred capital losses are as follows:


Expiration Date	Municipal Fund		California Fund		New York Fund

September 30, 2017	$	18,034,628	$	4,562,453	$	7,946,914
September 30, 2018		56,183,712		23,169,615		8,909,352
September 30, 2019		16,458,561		7,665,268		6,463,209

Total capital loss carryforwards	$	90,676,901	$	35,397,336	$	23,319,475

Deferred capital losses:
Short-term	$	32,052,183	$	9,728,388	$	4,438,231
Long-term	$	9,034,773	$	18,958,096	$	2,339,765


		33

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements — continued

The cost and unrealized appreciation (depreciation) of investments of each Fund at September 30, 2016, as determined on a federal income tax basis, were as follows:


	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund

Aggregate cost	$	805,232,157		$	241,115,710		$	189,146,624

Gross unrealized appreciation	$	167,959,404		$	40,165,946		$	32,644,074
Gross unrealized depreciation		(1,157,138	)		(567,492	)		(1,083,410	)

Net unrealized appreciation	$	166,802,266		$	39,598,454		$	31,560,664

3 Investment Adviser Fee and Other Transactions with Affiliates

The investment adviser fee is earned by Eaton Vance Management (EVM) as compensation for investment advisory services rendered to each Fund. Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement for New York Fund, the fee is computed at an annual rate of 0.65% of its average weekly gross assets. Pursuant to the investment advisory agreement and a subsequent fee reduction agreement between each of Municipal Fund and California Fund and EVM, the fee is calculated at an annual rate of 0.60% of each Fund’s average weekly gross assets. The fee reductions cannot be terminated without the consent of a majority of Trustees and a majority of shareholders. Average weekly gross assets include the principal amount of any indebtedness for money borrowed, including debt securities issued by a Fund. Pursuant to a fee reduction agreement between each Fund and EVM, average weekly gross assets are calculated by adding to net assets the amount payable by the Fund to floating rate note holders, such adjustment being limited to the value of the Auction Preferred Shares (APS) outstanding prior to any APS redemptions by the Fund. The investment adviser fee is payable monthly. EVM also serves as the administrator of each Fund, but receives no compensation. For the year ended September 30, 2016, the investment adviser fees were as follows:


	Municipal Fund		California Fund		New York Fund

Investment Adviser Fee	$	9,497,157	$	2,814,035	$	2,366,224

Trustees and officers of the Funds who are members of EVM’s organization receive remuneration for their services to the Funds out of the investment adviser fee. Trustees of the Funds who are not affiliated with the investment adviser may elect to defer receipt of all or a percentage of their annual fees in accordance with the terms of the Trustees Deferred Compensation Plan. For the year ended September 30, 2016, no significant amounts have been deferred. Certain officers and Trustees of the Funds are officers of EVM.

4 Purchases and Sales of Investments

Purchases and sales of investments, other than short-term obligations, for the year ended September 30, 2016 were as follows:


	Municipal Fund		California Fund		New York Fund

Purchases	$	285,788,465	$	80,131,209	$	49,687,821
Sales	$	275,661,626	$	54,174,193	$	38,757,265

5 Common Shares of Beneficial Interest

The Funds may issue common shares pursuant to their dividend reinvestment plans. For the year ended September 30, 2016, the California Fund and New York Fund issued 3,162 and 3,195 common shares, respectively, pursuant to its dividend reinvestment plan and there were no common shares issued by the Municipal Fund. For the year ended September 30, 2015, there were no common shares issued by the Funds.

On November 11, 2013, the Boards of Trustees of the Funds authorized the repurchase by each Fund of up to 10% of its then currently outstanding common shares in open-market transactions at a discount to net asset value (NAV). The repurchase program does not obligate the Funds to purchase a specific amount of shares. There were no repurchases of common shares by the Funds for the year ended September 30, 2016. During the year ended


		34

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements — continued

September 30, 2015, the number, cost (including brokerage commissions), average price per share and weighted average discount per share to NAV of common shares repurchased, were as follows:


	Year Ended September 30, 2015
	Municipal Fund		California Fund			New York Fund

Common shares repurchased		—		7,500			23,000
Cost, including brokerage commissions, of common shares repurchased		—	$	87,649		$	287,318
Average price per share		—	$	11.69		$	12.49
Weighted average discount per share to NAV		—		9.90	%		11.61	%

6 Overdraft Advances

Pursuant to the custodian agreement, SSBT may, in its discretion, advance funds to the Funds to make properly authorized payments. When such payments result in an overdraft, the Funds are obligated to repay SSBT at the current rate of interest charged by SSBT for secured loans (currently, the Federal Funds rate plus 2%). This obligation is payable on demand to SSBT. SSBT has a lien on a Fund’s assets to the extent of any overdraft. At September 30, 2016, the Municipal Fund and New York Fund had a payment due to SSBT pursuant to the foregoing arrangement of $2,420,677 and $824,024, respectively. Based on the short-term nature of these payments and the variable interest rate, the carrying value of the overdraft advances approximated its fair value at September 30, 2016. If measured at fair value, overdraft advances would have been considered as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy (see Note 8) at September 30, 2016. The Funds’ average overdraft advances during the year ended September 30, 2016 were not significant.

7 Financial Instruments

The Funds may trade in financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of their investing activities. These financial instruments may include financial futures contracts and may involve, to a varying degree, elements of risk in excess of the amounts recognized for financial statement purposes. The notional or contractual amounts of these instruments represent the investment a Fund has in particular classes of financial instruments and do not necessarily represent the amounts potentially subject to risk. The measurement of the risks associated with these instruments is meaningful only when all related and offsetting transactions are considered. A summary of obligations under these financial instruments at September 30, 2016 is included in the Portfolio of Investments. At September 30, 2016, the Funds had sufficient cash and/or securities to cover commitments under these contracts.

Each Fund is subject to interest rate risk in the normal course of pursuing its investment objective. Because the Funds hold fixed-rate bonds, the value of these bonds may decrease if interest rates rise. The Funds enter into U.S. Treasury futures contracts to hedge against changes in interest rates.

The fair values of open derivative instruments (not considered to be hedging instruments for accounting disclosure purposes) and whose primary underlying risk exposure is interest rate risk at September 30, 2016 were as follows:


	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund

Asset Derivative:
Futures Contracts	$	648,274	⁽¹⁾	$	235,952	⁽¹⁾	$	141,545	⁽¹⁾

Total	$	648,274		$	235,952		$	141,545

⁽¹⁾	Amount represents cumulative unrealized appreciation on futures contracts. Only the current day’s variation margin on open futures contracts is reported within the Statement of Assets and Liabilities as Receivable or Payable for variation margin, as applicable.


		35

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements — continued

The effect of derivative instruments (not considered to be hedging instruments for accounting disclosure purposes) on the Statement of Operations and whose primary underlying risk exposure is interest rate risk for the year ended September 30, 2016 was as follows:


	Municipal Fund			California Fund			New York Fund

Realized Gain (Loss) on Derivatives Recognized in Income	$	(5,040,888	)⁽¹⁾	$	(2,327,201	)⁽¹⁾	$	(1,100,627	)⁽¹⁾
Change in Unrealized Appreciation (Depreciation) on Derivatives Recognized in Income	$	1,290,978	⁽²⁾	$	595,359	⁽²⁾	$	281,873	⁽²⁾

⁽¹⁾	Statement of Operations location: Net realized gain (loss) – Financial futures contracts.

⁽²⁾	Statement of Operations location: Change in unrealized appreciation (depreciation) – Financial futures contracts.

The average notional amount of futures contracts outstanding during the year ended September 30, 2016, which is indicative of the volume of this derivative type, was approximately as follows:


	Municipal Fund		California Fund		New York Fund

Average Notional Amount:

Futures Contracts — Short	$	36,918,000	$	25,644,000	$	8,061,000

8 Fair Value Measurements

Under generally accepted accounting principles for fair value measurements, a three-tier hierarchy to prioritize the assumptions, referred to as inputs, is used in valuation techniques to measure fair value. The three-tier hierarchy of inputs is summarized in the three broad levels listed below.

•

Level 1 – quoted prices in active markets for identical investments

•

Level 2 – other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar investments, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.)

•

Level 3 – significant unobservable inputs (including a fund’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments)

In cases where the inputs used to measure fair value fall in different levels of the fair value hierarchy, the level disclosed is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The inputs or methodology used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in those securities.

At September 30, 2016, the hierarchy of inputs used in valuing the Funds’ investments and open derivative instruments, which are carried at value, were as follows:


Municipal Fund
Asset Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total

Tax-Exempt Investments	$	—	$	1,588,474,423	$	—	$	1,588,474,423

Total Investments	$	—	$	1,588,474,423	$	—	$	1,588,474,423
Futures Contracts	$	648,274	$	—	$	—	$	648,274

Total	$	648,274	$	1,588,474,423	$	—	$	1,589,122,697


		36

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Notes to Financial Statements — continued


California Fund
Asset Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total

Tax-Exempt Investments	$	—	$	474,594,164	$	—	$	474,594,164

Total Investments	$	—	$	474,594,164	$	—	$	474,594,164
Futures Contracts	$	235,952	$	—	$	—	$	235,952

Total	$	235,952	$	474,594,164	$	—	$	474,830,116


New York Fund
Asset Description	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total

Tax-Exempt Investments	$	—	$	363,797,288	$	—	$	363,797,288

Total Investments	$	—	$	363,797,288	$	—	$	363,797,288
Futures Contracts	$	141,545	$	—	$	—	$	141,545

Total	$	141,545	$	363,797,288	$	—	$	363,938,833

The Funds held no investments or other financial instruments as of September 30, 2015 whose fair value was determined using Level 3 inputs. At September 30, 2016, there were no investments transferred between Level 1 and Level 2 during the year then ended.


		37

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Trustees and Shareholders of Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund, Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund and Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund:

We have audited the accompanying statements of assets and liabilities of Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund, Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund and Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund (collectively, the “Funds”), including the portfolios of investments, as of September 30, 2016, and the related statements of operations and cash flows for the year then ended, the statements of changes in net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended. These financial statements and financial highlights are the responsibility of the Funds’ 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 the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). 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. The Funds are not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of their internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Funds’ internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our procedures included confirmation of securities owned as of September 30, 2016, by correspondence with the custodian and brokers; where replies were not received from brokers, we performed other auditing procedures. 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 positions of Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund, Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund and Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund as of September 30, 2016, the results of their operations and their cash flows for the year then ended, the changes in their net assets for each of the two years in the period then ended, and the financial highlights for each of the five years in the period then ended, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Boston, Massachusetts

November 17, 2016


		38

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Federal Tax Information (Unaudited)

The Form 1099-DIV you receive in February 2017 will show the tax status of all distributions paid to your account in calendar year 2016. Shareholders are advised to consult their own tax adviser with respect to the tax consequences of their investment in the Funds. As required by the Internal Revenue Code and/or regulations, shareholders must be notified regarding exempt-interest dividends.

Exempt-Interest Dividends. For the fiscal year ended September 30, 2016, the Funds designate the following percentages of distributions from net investment income as exempt-interest dividends:


Municipal Bond Fund	100.00	%
California Municipal Bond Fund	99.45	%
New York Municipal Bond Fund	99.20	%


		39

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Annual Meeting of Shareholders (Unaudited)

The Funds held their Annual Meeting of Shareholders on July 21, 2016. The following action was taken by the shareholders:

Item 1: The election of Scott E. Eston, Thomas E. Faust Jr. and Cynthia E. Frost as Class II Trustees of each Fund for a three-year term expiring in 2019.


	Nominee for Class II Trustee Elected by All Shareholders: Scott E. Eston		Nominee for Class II Trustee Elected by All Shareholders: Thomas E. Faust Jr.¹		Nominee for Class II Trustee Elected by All Shareholders: Cynthia E. Frost
Municipal Fund
For		58,923,307		58,895,007		58,836,127
Withheld		3,993,342		4,021,641		4,080,522
California Fund
For		18,499,609		18,490,651		18,483,610
Withheld		1,085,415		1,094,373		1,101,414
New York Fund
For		13,264,110		13,398,812		13,265,022
Withheld		381,960		247,258		381,048

¹	Excludes fractional shares.


		40

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Dividend Reinvestment Plan

Each Fund offers a dividend reinvestment plan (Plan) pursuant to which shareholders may elect to have distributions automatically reinvested in common shares (Shares) of the Fund. You may elect to participate in the Plan by completing the Dividend Reinvestment Plan Application Form. If you do not participate, you will receive all distributions in cash paid by check mailed directly to you by American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, LLC (AST) as dividend paying agent. On the distribution payment date, if the NAV per Share is equal to or less than the market price per Share plus estimated brokerage commissions, then new Shares will be issued. The number of Shares shall be determined by the greater of the NAV per Share or 95% of the market price. Otherwise, Shares generally will be purchased on the open market by AST, the Plan agent (Agent). Distributions subject to income tax (if any) are taxable whether or not Shares are reinvested.

If your Shares are in the name of a brokerage firm, bank, or other nominee, you can ask the firm or nominee to participate in the Plan on your behalf. If the nominee does not offer the Plan, you will need to request that each Fund’s transfer agent re-register your Shares in your name or you will not be able to participate.

The Agent’s service fee for handling distributions will be paid by each Fund. Plan participants will be charged their pro rata share of brokerage commissions on all open-market purchases.

Plan participants may withdraw from the Plan at any time by writing to the Agent at the address noted on the following page. If you withdraw, you will receive Shares in your name for all Shares credited to your account under the Plan. If a participant elects by written notice to the Agent to sell part or all of his or her Shares and remit the proceeds, the Agent is authorized to deduct a $5.00 fee plus brokerage commissions from the proceeds.

If you wish to participate in the Plan and your Shares are held in your own name, you may complete the form on the following page and deliver it to the Agent. Any inquiries regarding the Plan can be directed to the Agent at 1-866-439-6787.


		41

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Application for Participation in Dividend Reinvestment Plan

This form is for shareholders who hold their common shares in their own names. If your common shares are held in the name of a brokerage firm, bank, or other nominee, you should contact your nominee to see if it will participate in the Plan on your behalf. If you wish to participate in the Plan, but your brokerage firm, bank, or nominee is unable to participate on your behalf, you should request that your common shares be re-registered in your own name which will enable your participation in the Plan.

The following authorization and appointment is given with the understanding that I may terminate it at any time by terminating my participation in the Plan as provided in the terms and conditions of the Plan.

Please print exact name on account:

Shareholder signature Date

Please sign exactly as your common shares are registered. All persons whose names appear on the share certificate must sign.

YOU SHOULD NOT RETURN THIS FORM IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE YOUR DISTRIBUTIONS IN CASH. THIS IS NOT A PROXY.

This authorization form, when signed, should be mailed to the following address:

Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Funds

c/o American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, LLC

P.O. Box 922

Wall Street Station

New York, NY 10269-0560

Number of Employees

Each Fund is organized as a Massachusetts business trust and is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, as a closed-end management investment company and has no employees.

Number of Shareholders

As of September 30, 2016, Fund records indicate that there are 146, 25 and 39 registered shareholders for Municipal Bond Fund, California Municipal Bond Fund and New York Municipal Bond Fund, respectively, and approximately 23,929, 4,974 and 4,199 shareholders owning the Fund shares in street name, such as through brokers, banks, and financial intermediaries for Municipal Bond Fund, California Municipal Bond Fund and New York Municipal Bond Fund, respectively.

If you are a street name shareholder and wish to receive Fund reports directly, which contain important information about a Fund, please write or call:

Eaton Vance Distributors, Inc.

Two International Place

Boston, MA 02110

1-800-262-1122

NYSE MKT symbols


Municipal Bond Fund		EIM
California Municipal Bond Fund		EVM
New York Municipal Bond Fund		ENX


		42

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Board of Trustees’ Contract Approval

Overview of the Contract Review Process

The Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), provides, in substance, that each investment advisory agreement between a fund and its investment adviser will continue in effect from year to year only if its continuation is approved at least annually by the fund’s board of trustees, including by a vote of a majority of the trustees who are not “interested persons” of the fund (“Independent Trustees”), cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of considering such approval.

At a meeting of the Boards of Trustees (each a “Board”) of the registered investment companies advised, administered and/or distributed by Eaton Vance Management or its affiliates (the “Eaton Vance Funds”) held on April 26, 2016, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, voted to approve continuation of existing investment advisory and sub-advisory agreements for the Eaton Vance Funds for an additional one-year period. In voting its approval, the Board relied upon the affirmative recommendation of its Contract Review Committee, which is a committee comprised exclusively of Independent Trustees. Prior to making its recommendation, the Contract Review Committee reviewed information furnished by each adviser to the Eaton Vance Funds (including information specifically requested by the Board) for a series of meetings of the Contract Review Committee held between February and April 2016. The Contract Review Committee also considered information received at prior meetings of the Board and its committees, as relevant to its annual evaluation of the investment advisory and sub-advisory agreements.

The information that the Board considered included, among other things, the following (for funds that invest through one or more underlying portfolio(s), references to “each fund” in this section may include information that was considered at the portfolio-level):

Information about Fees, Performance and Expenses

•

A report from an independent data provider comparing the advisory and related fees paid by each fund with fees paid by comparable funds as identified by the independent data provider (“comparable funds”);

•

A report from an independent data provider comparing each fund’s total expense ratio and its components to comparable funds;

•

A report from an independent data provider comparing the investment performance of each fund (including, where relevant, yield data, Sharpe ratios and information ratios) to the investment performance of comparable funds over various time periods;

•

Data regarding investment performance in comparison to benchmark indices and customized groups of peer funds identified by the adviser in consultation with the Board;

•

For each fund, comparative information concerning the fees charged and the services provided by each adviser in managing other accounts (including mutual funds, other collective investment funds and institutional accounts) using investment strategies and techniques similar to those used in managing such fund;

•

Profitability analyses for each adviser with respect to each fund;

Information about Portfolio Management and Trading

•

Descriptions of the investment management services provided to each fund, including the investment strategies and processes it employs;

•

The procedures and processes used to determine the fair value of fund assets and actions taken to monitor and test the effectiveness of such procedures and processes;

•

Information about each adviser’s policies and practices with respect to trading, including each adviser’s processes for monitoring best execution of portfolio transactions;

•

Information about the allocation of brokerage transactions and the benefits received by each adviser as a result of brokerage allocation, including information concerning the acquisition of research through client commission arrangements and policies with respect to “soft dollars”;

•

Data relating to portfolio turnover rates of each fund;

Information about each Adviser

•

Reports detailing the financial results and condition of each adviser;

•

Descriptions of the qualifications, education and experience of the individual investment professionals whose responsibilities include portfolio management and investment research for the funds, and information relating to their compensation and responsibilities with respect to managing other mutual funds and investment accounts;

•

The Code of Ethics of each adviser and its affiliates, together with information relating to compliance with and the administration of such codes;

•

Policies and procedures relating to proxy voting and the handling of corporate actions and class actions;

•

Information concerning the resources devoted to compliance efforts undertaken by each adviser and its affiliates (including descriptions of various compliance programs) and their record of compliance;

•

Information concerning the business continuity and disaster recovery plans of each adviser and its affiliates;

•

A description of Eaton Vance Management’s procedures for overseeing third party advisers and sub-advisers, including with respect to regulatory and compliance issues, investment management and other matters;


		43

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Board of Trustees’ Contract Approval — continued

Other Relevant Information

•

Information concerning the nature, cost and character of the administrative and other non-investment advisory services provided by Eaton Vance Management and its affiliates;

•

Information concerning management of the relationship with the custodian, subcustodians and fund accountants by each adviser or the funds’ administrator; and

•

The terms of each investment advisory agreement.

Over the course of the twelve-month period ended April 30, 2016, with respect to one or more funds, the Board met ten times and the Contract Review Committee, the Audit Committee, the Governance Committee, the Portfolio Management Committee and the Compliance Reports and Regulatory Matters Committee, each of which is a Committee comprised solely of Independent Trustees, met seven, sixteen, four, nine and eleven times, respectively. At such meetings, the Trustees participated in investment and performance reviews with the portfolio managers and other investment professionals of each investment adviser relating to each fund, and considered various investment and trading strategies used in pursuing each fund’s investment objective, such as the use of derivative instruments, as well as risk management techniques. The Board and its Committees also evaluated issues pertaining to industry and regulatory developments, compliance procedures, fund governance and other issues with respect to the funds, and received and participated in reports and presentations provided by Eaton Vance Management and other fund advisers with respect to such matters. In addition to the formal meetings of the Board and its Committees, the Independent Trustees hold regular teleconferences in between meetings to discuss, among other topics, matters relating to the continuation of investment advisory and sub-advisory agreements.

For funds that invest through one or more underlying portfolios, the Board considered similar information about the portfolio(s) when considering the approval of investment advisory agreements. In addition, in cases where the fund’s investment adviser has engaged a sub-adviser, the Board considered similar information about the sub-adviser when considering the approval of any sub-advisory agreement.

The Contract Review Committee was assisted throughout the contract review process by Goodwin Procter LLP, independent legal counsel for the Independent Trustees. The members of the Contract Review Committee relied upon the advice of such counsel and their own business judgment in determining the material factors to be considered in evaluating each investment advisory and sub-advisory agreement and the weight to be given to each such factor. The conclusions reached with respect to each investment advisory and sub-advisory agreement were based on a comprehensive evaluation of all the information provided and not any single factor. Moreover, each member of the Contract Review Committee may have placed varying emphasis on particular factors in reaching conclusions with respect to each investment advisory and sub-advisory agreement. In evaluating each investment advisory and sub-advisory agreement, including the specific fee structures and other terms of the agreements, the Contract Review Committee was informed by multiple years of analysis and discussion among the Independent Trustees and the Eaton Vance Funds’ advisers and sub-advisers.

Results of the Process

Based on its consideration of the foregoing, and such other information as it deemed relevant, including the factors and conclusions described below, the Contract Review Committee concluded that the continuation of the investment advisory agreements of the following funds:

•

Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund

•

Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund

•

Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund

(the “Funds”), each with Eaton Vance Management (the “Adviser”), including their fee structures, is in the interests of shareholders and, therefore, the Contract Review Committee recommended to the Board approval of each agreement. The Board accepted the recommendation of the Contract Review Committee based on the material factors considered and conclusions reached by the Contract Review Committee with respect to each agreement. Accordingly, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, voted to approve continuation of the investment advisory agreement for each Fund.

Nature, Extent and Quality of Services

In considering whether to approve the investment advisory agreements of the Funds, the Board evaluated the nature, extent and quality of services provided to the Funds by the Adviser.

The Board considered the Adviser’s management capabilities and investment process with respect to the types of investments held by each Fund, including the education, experience and number of its investment professionals and other personnel who provide portfolio management, investment research, and similar services to the Funds. In particular, the Board considered the abilities and experience of such investment professionals in analyzing factors such as credit risk, tax efficiency, and special considerations relevant to investing in municipal bonds. The Board considered the Adviser’s municipal bond team, which includes portfolio managers and credit specialists who provide services to the Funds. The Board also took into account the resources dedicated to portfolio management and other services, as well as the compensation methods of the Adviser and other factors, such as the reputation and resources of the Adviser to recruit and retain highly qualified research, advisory and supervisory investment professionals. In addition, the Board considered the time


		44

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Board of Trustees’ Contract Approval — continued

and attention devoted to the Eaton Vance Funds, including each Fund, by senior management, as well as the infrastructure, operational capabilities and support staff in place to assist in the portfolio management and operations of the Funds, including the provision of administrative services.

The Board considered the compliance programs of the Adviser and relevant affiliates thereof. Among other matters, the Board considered compliance and reporting matters relating to personal trading by investment professionals, selective disclosure of portfolio holdings, late trading, frequent trading, portfolio valuation, business continuity and the allocation of investment opportunities. The Board also considered the responses of the Adviser and its affiliates to requests in recent years from regulatory authorities such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

The Board considered shareholder and other administrative services provided or managed by Eaton Vance Management and its affiliates, including transfer agency and accounting services. The Board evaluated the benefits to shareholders of investing in a fund that is a part of a large fund complex offering exposure to a variety of asset classes and investment disciplines.

After consideration of the foregoing factors, among others, the Board concluded that the nature, extent and quality of services provided by the Adviser, taken as a whole, are appropriate and consistent with the terms of the investment advisory agreements.

Fund Performance

The Board compared each Fund’s investment performance to that of comparable funds and appropriate benchmark indices and assessed each Fund’s performance on the basis of total return and current income return. The Board’s review included comparative performance data for the one-, three-, five- and ten-year periods ended September 30, 2015 for each Fund. The Board considered, among other things, the Adviser’s efforts to generate competitive levels of tax-exempt current income over time through investments that, relative to comparable funds, focus on higher quality municipal bonds with longer maturities. With respect to Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund, the Board noted the adverse impact of the Fund’s focus on higher quality debt instruments relative to comparable funds. With respect to Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund and Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund, the Board concluded that the performance of each Fund was satisfactory.

Management Fees and Expenses

The Board considered contractual fee rates payable by each Fund for advisory and administrative services (referred to collectively as “management fees”). As part of its review, the Board considered each Fund’s management fees and total expense ratio for the one year period ended September 30, 2015, as compared to those of comparable funds, before and after giving effect to any undertaking to waive fees or reimburse expenses. The Board also considered factors that had an impact on Fund expense ratios relative to comparable funds, and, with respect to Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund, certain Fund specific factors, as identified by management in response to inquiries from the Contract Review Committee.

After considering the foregoing information, and in light of the nature, extent and quality of the services provided by the Adviser, the Board concluded that the management fees charged for advisory and related services are reasonable.

Profitability and Other “Fall-Out” Benefits

The Board considered the level of profits realized by the Adviser and relevant affiliates thereof in providing investment advisory and administrative services to each Fund and to all Eaton Vance Funds as a group. The Board considered the level of profits realized without regard to marketing support or other payments by the Adviser and its affiliates to third parties in respect of distribution services. The Board also considered other direct or indirect fall-out benefits received by the Adviser and its affiliates in connection with their relationships with the Funds, including the benefits of research services that may be available to the Adviser as a result of securities transactions effected for the Funds and other investment advisory clients.

The Board concluded that, in light of the foregoing factors and the nature, extent and quality of the services rendered, the profits realized by the Adviser and its affiliates are deemed not to be excessive.

Economies of Scale

In reviewing management fees and profitability, the Board also considered the extent to which the Adviser and its affiliates, on the one hand, and each Fund, on the other hand, can expect to realize benefits from economies of scale as the assets of each Fund increase. The Board acknowledged the difficulty in accurately measuring the benefits resulting from economies of scale, if any, with respect to the management of any specific fund or group of funds. The Board reviewed data summarizing the increases and decreases in the assets of each Fund and of all Eaton Vance Funds as a group over various time periods, and evaluated the extent to which the total expense ratio of each Fund and the profitability of the Adviser and its affiliates may have been affected by such increases or decreases. Based upon the foregoing, the Board concluded that each Fund currently shares in any benefits from economies of scale. The Board also considered the fact that the Funds are not continuously offered and that the Funds’ assets are not expected to increase materially in the foreseeable future. The Board concluded that, in light of the level of the Adviser’s profits with respect to each Fund, the implementation of breakpoints in the advisory fee schedules is not warranted at this time.


		45

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Management and Organization

Fund Management. The Trustees of Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund, Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund and Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund (the Funds) are responsible for the overall management and supervision of the Funds’ affairs. The Trustees and officers of the Funds are listed below. Except as indicated, each individual has held the office shown or other offices in the same company for the last five years. The “Noninterested Trustees” consist of those Trustees who are not “interested persons” of the Funds, as that term is defined under the 1940 Act. The business address of each Trustee and officer is Two International Place, Boston, Massachusetts 02110. As used below, “EVC” refers to Eaton Vance Corp., “EV” refers to Eaton Vance, Inc., “EVM” refers to Eaton Vance Management, “BMR” refers to Boston Management and Research, “EVMI” refers to Eaton Vance Management (International) Limited and “EVD” refers to Eaton Vance Distributors, Inc. EVC and EV are the corporate parent and trustee, respectively, of EVM and BMR. EVMI is an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of EVC. EVD is a wholly-owned subsidiary of EVC. Each officer affiliated with Eaton Vance may hold a position with other Eaton Vance affiliates that is comparable to his or her position with EVM listed below. Each Trustee oversees 176 portfolios in the Eaton Vance Complex (including all master and feeder funds in a master feeder structure). Each officer serves as an officer of certain other Eaton Vance funds. Each Trustee serves for a three year term. Each officer serves until his or her successor is elected.


Name and Year of Birth	Position(s) with the Funds	Term Expiring; Trustee Since⁽¹⁾	Principal Occupation(s) and Directorships During Past Five Years and Other Relevant Experience
Interested Trustee

Thomas E. Faust Jr. 1958	Class II Trustee	Until 2019. Trustee since 2007.	Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of EVC, Director and President of EV, Chief Executive Officer and President of EVM and BMR, and Director of EVD and EVMI. Trustee and/or officer of 176 registered investment companies. Mr. Faust is an interested person because of his positions with EVM, BMR, EVD, EVMI, EVC and EV, which are affiliates of the Funds. Directorships in the Last Five Years.⁽²⁾ Director of EVC and Hexavest Inc. (investment management firm).


Noninterested Trustees

Scott E. Eston 1956	Class II Trustee	Until 2019. Trustee since 2011.	Private investor. Formerly held various positions at Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo and Co., L.L.C. (investment management firm) (1997-2009), including Chief Operating Officer (2002-2009), Chief Financial Officer (1997-2009) and Chairman of the Executive Committee (2002-2008); President and Principal Executive Officer, GMO Trust (open-end registered investment company) (2006-2009). Former Partner, Coopers and Lybrand L.L.P. (now PricewaterhouseCoopers) (a registered public accounting firm) (1987-1997). Mr. Eston has apprised the Board of Trustees that he intends to retire as a Trustee of all Eaton Vance funds effective September 30, 2017. Directorships in the Last Five Years.⁽²⁾ None.

Mark R. Fetting⁽³⁾ 1954	Class I Trustee	Until 2018. Trustee since 2016.	Private investor. Formerly, held various positions at Legg Mason, Inc. (investment management firm) (2000-2012), including President, Chief Executive Officer, Director and Chairman (2008-2012), Senior Executive Vice President (2004-2008) and Executive Vice President (2001-2004). Formerly, President of Legg Mason family of funds (2001-2008). Formerly, Division President and Senior Officer of Prudential Financial Group, Inc. and related companies (investment management firm) (1991-2000). Directorships in the Last Five Years. Director and Chairman of Legg Mason, Inc. (2008-2012); Director/Trustee and Chairman of Legg Mason family of funds (14 funds) (2008-2012); and Director/Trustee of the Royce family of funds (35 funds) (2001-2012).

Cynthia E. Frost 1961	Class II Trustee	Until 2019. Trustee since 2014.	Private investor. Formerly, Chief Investment Officer of Brown University (university endowment) (2000-2012); Portfolio Strategist for Duke Management Company (university endowment manager) (1995-2000); Managing Director, Cambridge Associates (investment consulting company) (1989-1995); Consultant, Bain and Company (management consulting firm) (1987-1989); Senior Equity Analyst, BA Investment Management Company (1983-1985). Directorships in the Last Five Years. None.

George J. Gorman 1952	Class III Trustee	Until 2017. Trustee since 2014.	Principal at George J. Gorman LLC (consulting firm). Formerly, Senior Partner at Ernst & Young LLP (a registered public accounting firm) (1974-2009). Directorships in the Last Five Years. Formerly, Trustee of the BofA Funds Series Trust (11 funds) (2011-2014) and of the Ashmore Funds (9 funds) (2010-2014).


		46

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Management and Organization — continued


Name and Year of Birth	Position(s) with the Funds	Term Expiring; Trustee Since⁽¹⁾	Principal Occupation(s) and Directorships During Past Five Years and Other Relevant Experience
Noninterested Trustees (continued)

Valerie A. Mosley 1960	Class I Trustee	Until 2018. Trustee since 2014.	Chairwoman and Chief Executive Officer of Valmo Ventures (a consulting and investment firm). Former Partner and Senior Vice President, Portfolio Manager and Investment Strategist at Wellington Management Company, LLP (investment management firm) (1992-2012). Former Chief Investment Officer, PG Corbin Asset Management (1990-1992). Formerly worked in institutional corporate bond sales at Kidder Peabody (1986-1990). Directorships in the Last Five Years.⁽²⁾ Director of Dynex Capital, Inc. (mortgage REIT) (since 2013).

William H. Park 1947	Chairperson of the Board and Class I Trustee	Until 2018. Chairperson of the Board since 2016 and Trustee since 2003.	Private investor. Formerly, Consultant (management and transactional) (2012-2014). Formerly, Chief Financial Officer, Aveon Group L.P. (investment management firm) (2010-2011). Formerly, Vice Chairman, Commercial Industrial Finance Corp. (specialty finance company) (2006-2010). Formerly, President and Chief Executive Officer, Prizm Capital Management, LLC (investment management firm) (2002-2005). Formerly, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, United Asset Management Corporation (investment management firm) (1982-2001). Formerly, Senior Manager, Price Waterhouse (now PricewaterhouseCoopers) (a registered public accounting firm) (1972-1981). Directorships in the Last Five Years.⁽²⁾ None.

Helen Frame Peters 1948	Class III Trustee	Until 2017. Trustee since 2008.	Professor of Finance, Carroll School of Management, Boston College. Formerly, Dean, Carroll School of Management, Boston College (2000-2002). Formerly, Chief Investment Officer, Fixed Income, Scudder Kemper Investments (investment management firm) (1998-1999). Formerly, Chief Investment Officer, Equity and Fixed Income, Colonial Management Associates (investment management firm) (1991-1998). Directorships in the Last Five Years.⁽²⁾ Formerly, Director of BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc. (wholesale club retailer) (2004-2011). Formerly, Trustee of SPDR Index Shares Funds and SPDR Series Trust (exchange traded funds) (2000-2009). Formerly, Director of Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston (a bank for banks) (2007-2009).

Susan J. Sutherland 1957	Class III Trustee	Until 2017. Trustee since 2015.	Private investor. Formerly, Associate, Counsel and Partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP (law firm) (1982-2013). Directorships in the Last Five Years. Formerly, Director of Montpelier Re Holdings Ltd. (global provider of customized insurance and reinsurance products) (2013-2015).

Harriett Tee Taggart 1948	Class III Trustee	Until 2017. Trustee since 2011.	Managing Director, Taggart Associates (a professional practice firm). Formerly, Partner and Senior Vice President, Wellington Management Company, LLP (investment management firm) (1983-2006). Directorships in the Last Five Years.⁽²⁾ Director of Albemarle Corporation (chemicals manufacturer) (since 2007) and The Hanover Group (specialty property and casualty insurance company) (since 2009). Formerly, Director of Lubrizol Corporation (specialty chemicals) (2007-2011).

Ralph F. Verni 1943	Class I Trustee	Until 2018. Trustee since 2005.	Consultant and private investor. Formerly, Chief Investment Officer (1982-1992), Chief Financial Officer (1988-1990) and Director (1982-1992), New England Life. Formerly, Chairperson, New England Mutual Funds (1982-1992). Formerly, President and Chief Executive Officer, State Street Management & Research (1992-2000). Formerly, Chairperson, State Street Research Mutual Funds (1992-2000). Formerly, Director, W.P. Carey, LLC (1998-2004) and First Pioneer Farm Credit Corp. (financial services cooperative) (2002-2006). Consistent with the Trustee retirement policy, Mr. Verni is currently expected to retire as a Trustee of all Eaton Vance funds effective July 1, 2017. Directorships in the Last Five Years.⁽²⁾ None.


		47

Eaton Vance

Municipal Bond Funds

September 30, 2016

Management and Organization — continued


Name and Year of Birth	Position(s) with the Funds	Term Expiring; Trustee Since⁽¹⁾	Principal Occupation(s) and Directorships During Past Five Years and Other Relevant Experience
Noninterested Trustees (continued)

Scott E. Wennerholm⁽³⁾ 1959	Class II Trustee	Until 2019. Trustee since 2016.	Consultant at GF Parish Group (executive recruiting firm). Trustee at Wheelock College (postsecondary institution) (since 2012). Formerly, Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice President at BNY Mellon Asset Management (investment management firm) (2005-2011). Formerly, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer at Natixis Global Asset Management (investment management firm) (1997-2004). Formerly, Vice President at Fidelity Investments Institutional Services (investment management firm) (1994-1997). Directorships in the Last Five Years. None.


Principal Officers who are not Trustees
Name and Year of Birth	Position(s) with the Funds	Officer Since⁽⁴⁾	Principal Occupation(s) During Past Five Years
Payson F. Swaffield 1956	President	2003	Vice President and Chief Income Investment Officer of EVM and BMR.
Maureen A. Gemma 1960	Vice President, Secretary and Chief Legal Officer	2005	Vice President of EVM and BMR.
James F. Kirchner 1967	Treasurer	2007	Vice President of EVM and BMR.
Paul M. O’Neil 1953	Chief Compliance Officer	2004	Vice President of EVM and BMR.

⁽¹⁾

Year first appointed to serve as Trustee for a fund in the Eaton Vance family of funds. Each Trustee has served continuously since appointment unless indicated otherwise. Each Trustee holds office until the annual meeting for the year in which his or her term expires and until his or her successor is elected and qualified, subject to a prior death, resignation, retirement, disqualification or removal.

⁽²⁾

During their respective tenures, the Trustees (except for Mmes. Frost and Sutherland and Messrs. Fetting, Gorman and Wennerholm) also served as Board members of one or more of the following funds (which operated in the years noted): eUnitsTM 2 Year U.S. Market Participation Trust: Upside to Cap / Buffered Downside (launched in 2012 and terminated in 2014); eUnitsTM 2 Year U.S. Market Participation Trust II: Upside to Cap / Buffered Downside (launched in 2012 and terminated in 2014); and Eaton Vance National Municipal Income Trust (launched in 1998 and terminated in 2009). However, Ms. Mosley did not serve as a Board member of eUnitsTM 2 Year U.S. Market Participation Trust: Upside to Cap / Buffered Downside (launched in 2012 and terminated in 2014).

⁽³⁾	Messrs. Fetting and Wennerholm began serving as Trustees effective September 1, 2016.

⁽⁴⁾	Year first elected to serve as officer of a fund in the Eaton Vance family of funds when the officer has served continuously. Otherwise, year of most recent election as an officer of a fund in the Eaton Vance family of funds. Titles may have changed since initial election.


		48

Eaton Vance Funds

IMPORTANT NOTICES

Privacy. The Eaton Vance organization is committed to ensuring your financial privacy. Each of the financial institutions identified below has in effect the following policy (“Privacy Policy”) with respect to nonpublic personal information about its customers:

•

Only such information received from you, through application forms or otherwise, and information about your Eaton Vance fund transactions will be collected. This may include information such as name, address, social security number, tax status, account balances and transactions.

•

None of such information about you (or former customers) will be disclosed to anyone, except as permitted by law (which includes disclosure to employees necessary to service your account). In the normal course of servicing a customer’s account, Eaton Vance may share information with unaffiliated third parties that perform various required services such as transfer agents, custodians and broker-dealers.

•

Policies and procedures (including physical, electronic and procedural safeguards) are in place that are designed to protect the confidentiality of such information.

•

We reserve the right to change our Privacy Policy at any time upon proper notification to you. Customers may want to review our Privacy Policy periodically for changes by accessing the link on our homepage: www.eatonvance.com.

Our pledge of privacy applies to the following entities within the Eaton Vance organization: the Eaton Vance Family of Funds, Eaton Vance Management, Eaton Vance Investment Counsel, Eaton Vance Distributors, Inc., Eaton Vance Trust Company, Eaton Vance Management (International) Limited, Eaton Vance Management’s Real Estate Investment Group and Boston Management and Research. In addition, our Privacy Policy applies only to those Eaton Vance customers who are individuals and who have a direct relationship with us. If a customer’s account (i.e., fund shares) is held in the name of a third-party financial advisor/broker-dealer, it is likely that only such advisor’s privacy policies apply to the customer. This notice supersedes all previously issued privacy disclosures. For more information about Eaton Vance’s Privacy Policy, please call 1-800-262-1122.

Delivery of Shareholder Documents. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits funds to deliver only one copy of shareholder documents, including prospectuses, proxy statements and shareholder reports, to fund investors with multiple accounts at the same residential or post office box address. This practice is often called “householding” and it helps eliminate duplicate mailings to shareholders. American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, LLC (“AST”), the closed-end funds transfer agent, or your financial advisor, may household the mailing of your documents indefinitely unless you instruct AST, or your financial advisor, otherwise. If you would prefer that your Eaton Vance documents not be householded, please contact AST or your financial advisor. Your instructions that householding not apply to delivery of your Eaton Vance documents will typically be effective within 30 days of receipt by AST or your financial advisor.

Portfolio Holdings. Each Eaton Vance Fund and its underlying Portfolio(s) (if applicable) will file a schedule of portfolio holdings on Form N-Q with the SEC for the first and third quarters of each fiscal year. The Form N-Q will be available on the Eaton Vance website at www.eatonvance.com, by calling Eaton Vance at 1-800-262-1122 or in the EDGAR database on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Form N-Q may also be reviewed and copied at the SEC’s public reference room in Washington, D.C. (call 1-800-732-0330 for information on the operation of the public reference room).

Proxy Voting. From time to time, funds are required to vote proxies related to the securities held by the funds. The Eaton Vance Funds or their underlying Portfolios (if applicable) vote proxies according to a set of policies and procedures approved by the Funds’ and Portfolios’ Boards. You may obtain a description of these policies and procedures and information on how the Funds or Portfolios voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, without charge, upon request, by calling 1-800-262-1122 and by accessing the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

Share Repurchase Program. The Funds’ Boards of Trustees have approved a share repurchase program authorizing each Fund to repurchase up to 10% of its outstanding common shares as of the approved date in open-market transactions at a discount to net asset value. The repurchase program does not obligate a Fund to purchase a specific amount of shares. The Funds’ repurchase activity, including the number of shares purchased, average price and average discount to net asset value, is disclosed in the Funds’ annual and semi-annual reports to shareholders.

Additional Notice to Shareholders. If applicable, a Fund may also redeem or purchase its outstanding preferred shares in order to maintain compliance with regulatory requirements, borrowing or rating agency requirements or for other purposes as it deems appropriate or necessary.

Closed-End Fund Information. Eaton Vance closed-end funds make fund performance data and certain information about portfolio characteristics available on the Eaton Vance website shortly after the end of each month. Other information about the funds is available on the website. The funds’ net asset value per share is readily accessible on the Eaton Vance website. Portfolio holdings for the most recent month-end are also posted to the website approximately 30 days following the end of the month. This information is available at www.eatonvance.com on the fund information pages under “Individual Investors — Closed-End Funds”.


		49

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Investment Adviser and Administrator

Eaton Vance Management

Two International Place

Boston, MA 02110

Custodian

State Street Bank and Trust Company

State Street Financial Center, One Lincoln Street

Boston, MA 02111

Transfer Agent

American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, LLC

6201 15^th Avenue

Brooklyn, NY 11219

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Deloitte & Touche LLP

200 Berkeley Street

Boston, MA 02116-5022

Fund Offices

Two International Place

Boston, MA 02110

LOGO

1453 9.30.16

Item 2. Code of Ethics

The registrant has adopted a code of ethics applicable to its Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer. The registrant undertakes to provide a copy of such code of ethics to any person upon request, without charge, by calling 1-800-262-1122. The registrant has not amended the code of ethics as described in Form N-CSR during the period covered by this report. The registrant has not granted any waiver, including an implicit waiver, from a provision of the code of ethics as described in Form N-CSR during the period covered by this report.

Item 3. Audit Committee Financial Expert

The registrant’s Board has designated William H. Park, an independent trustee, as its audit committee financial expert. Mr. Park is a certified public accountant who is a private investor. Previously, he served as a consultant, as the Chief Financial Officer of Aveon Group, L.P. (an investment management firm), as the Vice Chairman of Commercial Industrial Finance Corp. (specialty finance company), as President and Chief Executive Officer of Prizm Capital Management, LLC (investment management firm), as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of United Asset Management Corporation (an institutional investment management firm) and as a Senior Manager at Price Waterhouse (now PricewaterhouseCoopers) (an independent registered public accounting firm).

Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

Rule 2-01(c)(1)(ii)(A) of Regulation S-X (the “Loan Rule”) prohibits an accounting firm, such as the Fund’s principal accountant, Deloitte & Touche LLP (“D&T”), from having certain financial relationships with their audit clients and affiliated entities. Specifically, the Loan Rule provides, in relevant part, that an accounting firm generally would not be independent if it receives a loan from a lender that is a “record or beneficial owner of more than ten percent of the audit client’s equity securities.” Based on information provided to the Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees (the “Audit Committee”) of the Eaton Vance family of funds by D&T, certain relationships between D&T and its affiliates (“Deloitte Entities”) and its lenders who are record owners of shares of one or more funds within the Eaton Vance family of funds (the “Funds”) implicate the Loan Rule, calling into question D&T’s independence with respect to the Funds. The Funds are providing this disclosure to explain the facts and circumstances as well as D&T’s conclusions concerning D&T’s objectivity and impartiality with respect to the audits of the Funds.

D&T advised the Audit Committee of its conclusion that, in light of the facts surrounding its lending relationships, D&T’s objectivity and impartiality in the planning and conduct of the audits of the Funds financial statements will not be compromised, D&T is in a position to continue as the auditor for the Funds and no actions need to be taken with respect to previously issued reports by D&T. D&T has advised the Audit Committee that these conclusions were based in part on the following considerations: (1) Deloitte Entity personnel responsible for managing the lending relationships have had no interactions with the audit engagement team; (2) the lending relationships are in good standing and the principal and interest payments are up-to-date; (3) the lending relationships are not significant to the Deloitte Entities or to D&T.

On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) issued no-action relief to another mutual fund complex (see Fidelity Management & Research Company et al., No-Action Letter (June 20, 2016) (the “No-Action Letter”)) related to the auditor independence issue described above. In the No-Action Letter, the SEC indicated that it would not recommend enforcement action against the fund group if the auditor is not in compliance with the Loan Rule provided that: (1) the auditor has complied with PCAOB Rule 3526(b)(1) and 3526(b)(2); (2) the auditor’s non-compliance under the Loan Rule is with respect to certain lending relationships; and (3) notwithstanding such non-compliance, the auditor has concluded that it is objective and impartial with respect to the issues encompassed within its engagement as auditor of the funds. Based on information provided by D&T, the requirements of the No-Action Letter appear to be met with respect to D&T’s lending relationships described above. After giving consideration to the guidance provided in the No-Action Letter, D&T affirmed to the Audit Committee that D&T is an independent accountant with respect to the Funds within the meaning of the rules and standards of the PCAOB and the securities laws and regulations administered by the SEC. The SEC has indicated that the no-action relief will expire 18 months from its issuance.

(a) –(d)

The following table presents the aggregate fees billed to the registrant for the registrant’s fiscal years ended September 30, 2015 and September 30, 2016 by D&T for professional services rendered for the audit of the registrant’s annual financial statements and fees billed for other services rendered by D&T during such periods.


Fiscal Years Ended	9/30/15		9/30/16
Audit Fees	$	73,510	$	74,665
Audit-Related Fees⁽¹⁾	$	0	$	0
Tax Fees⁽²⁾	$	14,739	$	14,886
All Other Fees⁽³⁾	$	0	$	0

Total	$	88,249	$	89,551

⁽¹⁾	Audit-related fees consist of the aggregate fees billed for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit of the registrant’s financial statements and are not reported under the category of audit fees.

⁽²⁾	Tax fees consist of the aggregate fees billed for professional services rendered by the principal accountant relating to tax compliance, tax advice, and tax planning and specifically include fees for tax return preparation and other related tax compliance/planning matters.

⁽³⁾	All other fees consist of the aggregate fees billed for products and services provided by the principal accountant other than audit, audit-related, and tax services.

(e)(1) The registrant’s audit committee has adopted policies and procedures relating to the pre-approval of services provided by the registrant’s principal accountant (the “Pre-Approval Policies”). The Pre-Approval Policies establish a framework intended to assist the audit committee in the proper discharge of its pre-approval responsibilities. As a general matter, the Pre-Approval Policies (i) specify certain types of audit, audit-related, tax, and other services determined to be pre-approved by the audit committee; and (ii) delineate specific procedures governing the mechanics of the pre-approval process, including the approval and monitoring of audit and non-audit service fees. Unless a service is specifically pre-approved under the Pre-Approval Policies, it must be separately pre-approved by the audit committee.

The Pre-Approval Policies and the types of audit and non-audit services pre-approved therein must be reviewed and ratified by the registrant’s audit committee at least annually. The registrant’s audit committee maintains full responsibility for the appointment, compensation, and oversight of the work of the registrant’s principal accountant.

(e)(2) No services described in paragraphs (b)-(d) above were approved by the registrant’s audit committee pursuant to the “de minimis exception” set forth in Rule 2-01 (c)(7)(i)(C) of Regulation S-X.

(f) Not applicable.

(g) The following table presents (i) the aggregate non-audit fees (i.e., fees for audit-related, tax, and other services) billed to the registrant by D&T for the registrant’s fiscal years ended September 30, 2015 and September 30, 2016; and (ii) the aggregate non-audit fees (i.e., fees for audit-related, tax, and other services) billed to the Eaton Vance organization by D&T for the same time periods.


Fiscal Years Ended	9/30/15		9/30/16
Registrant	$	14,739	$	14,886
Eaton Vance⁽¹⁾	$	46,000	$	56,434

⁽¹⁾	The investment adviser to the registrant, as well as any of its affiliates that provide ongoing services to the registrant, are subsidiaries of Eaton Vance Corp.

(h) The registrant’s audit committee has considered whether the provision by the registrant’s principal accountant of non-audit services to the registrant’s investment adviser and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant that were not pre-approved pursuant to Rule 2-01(c)(7)(ii) of Regulation S-X is compatible with maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.

Item 5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants

The registrant has a separately-designated standing audit committee established in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Ralph F. Verni (Chair), Scott E. Eston, George J. Gorman, William H. Park and Scott E. Wennerholm are the members of the registrant’s audit committee.

Item 6. Schedule of Investments

Please see schedule of investments contained in the Report to Stockholders included under Item 1 of this Form N-CSR.

Item 7. Disclosure of Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies

The Board of Trustees of the Trust has adopted a proxy voting policy and procedure (the “Fund Policy”), pursuant to which the Trustees have delegated proxy voting responsibility to the Fund’s investment adviser and adopted the investment adviser’s proxy voting policies and procedures (the “Policies”) which are described below. The Trustees will review the Fund’s proxy voting records from time to time and will annually consider approving the Policies for the upcoming year. In the event that a conflict of interest arises between the Fund’s shareholders and the investment adviser, the administrator, or any of their affiliates or any affiliate of the Fund, the investment adviser will generally refrain from voting the proxies related to the companies giving rise to such conflict until it consults with the Board’s Special Committee except as contemplated under the Fund Policy. The Board’s Special Committee will instruct the investment adviser on the appropriate course of action.

The Policies are designed to promote accountability of a company’s management to its shareholders and to align the interests of management with those shareholders. An independent proxy voting service (“Agent”), currently Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc., has been retained to assist in the voting of proxies through the provision of vote analysis, implementation and recordkeeping and disclosure services. The investment adviser will generally vote proxies through the Agent. The Agent is required to vote all proxies and/or refer them back to the investment adviser pursuant to the Policies. It is generally the policy of the investment adviser to vote in accordance with the recommendation of the Agent. The Agent shall refer to the investment adviser proxies relating to mergers and restructurings, and the disposition of assets, termination, liquidation and mergers contained in mutual fund proxies. The investment adviser will normally vote against anti-takeover measures and other proposals designed to limit the ability of shareholders to act on possible transactions, except in the case of closed-end management investment companies. The investment adviser generally supports management on social and environmental proposals. The investment adviser may abstain from voting from time to time where it determines that the costs associated with voting a proxy outweighs the benefits derived from exercising the right to vote or the economic effect on shareholders interests or the value of the portfolio holding is indeterminable or insignificant.

In addition, the investment adviser will monitor situations that may result in a conflict of interest between the Fund’s shareholders and the investment adviser, the administrator, or any of their affiliates or any affiliate of the Fund by maintaining a list of significant existing and prospective corporate clients. The investment adviser’s personnel responsible for reviewing and voting proxies on behalf of the Fund will report any proxy received or expected to be received from a company included on that list to the personnel of the investment adviser identified in the Policies. If such personnel expects to instruct the Agent to vote such proxies in a manner inconsistent with the guidelines of the Policies or the recommendation of the Agent, the personnel will consult with members of senior management of the investment adviser to determine if a material conflict of interests exists. If it is determined that a material conflict does exist, the investment adviser will seek instruction on how to vote from the Special Committee.

Information on how the Fund voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during the most recent 12 month period ended June 30 is available (1) without charge, upon request, by calling 1-800-262-1122, and (2) on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

Item 8. Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management Investment Companies

Eaton Vance Management (“EVM” or “Eaton Vance”) is the investment adviser of each Fund. Craig R. Brandon, portfolio manager of Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund and Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund and Cynthia J. Clemson, portfolio manager of Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund are responsible for the overall and day-to-day management of each Fund’s investments.

Mr. Brandon is a Vice President of EVM, has been a portfolio manager of Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund since January 2014 and of Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund since November 2005, has been an EVM analyst since 1998 and is Co-Director of the Municipal Investments Group. Ms. Clemson is a Vice President of EVM, has been a portfolio manager of Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund since March 2014 and is Co-Director of the Municipal Investments Group. Mr. Brandon and Ms. Clemson have managed other Eaton Vance portfolios for more than five years. This information is provided as of the date of the filing of this report.

The following table shows, as of each Fund’s most recent fiscal year end, the number of accounts each portfolio manager managed in each of the listed categories and the total assets (in millions of dollars) in the accounts managed within each category. The table also shows the number of accounts with respect to which the advisory fee is based on the performance of the account, if any, and the total assets (in millions of dollars) in those accounts.


	Number of All Accounts		Total Assets of All Accounts		Number of Accounts Paying a Performance Fee		Total Assets of Accounts Paying a Performance Fee
Craig R. Brandon
Registered Investment Companies		18	$	6,840.1		0	$	0
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles		0	$	0		0	$	0
Other Accounts		0	$	0		0	$	0

Cynthia J. Clemson
Registered Investment Companies		13	$	5,164.0		0	$	0
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles		0	$	0		0	$	0
Other Accounts		0	$	0		0	$	0

The following table shows the dollar range of Fund shares beneficially owned by each portfolio manager as of each Fund’s most recent fiscal year end.


Fund Name and Portfolio Managers	Dollar Range of Equity Securities Beneficially Owned in the Fund
California Municipal Bond Fund
Craig R. Brandon		None

Municipal Bond Fund
Cynthia J. Clemson		None

New York Municipal Bond Fund
Craig R. Brandon		None

Potential for Conflicts of Interest. It is possible that conflicts of interest may arise in connection with a portfolio manager’s management of the Trust’s investments on the one hand and investments of other accounts for which a portfolio manager is responsible on the other. For example, a portfolio manager may have conflicts of interest in allocating management time, resources and investment opportunities among the Trust and other accounts he or she advises. In addition, due to differences in the investment strategies or restrictions between the Trust and the other accounts, a portfolio manager may take action with respect to another account that differs from the action taken with respect to the Trust. In some cases, another account managed by a portfolio manager may compensate the investment adviser based on the performance of the securities held by that account. The existence of such a performance based fee may create additional conflicts of interest for a portfolio manager in the allocation of management time, resources and investment opportunities. Whenever conflicts of interest arise, a portfolio manager will endeavor to exercise his or her discretion in a manner that he or she believes is equitable to all interested persons. EVM has adopted several policies and procedures designed to address these potential conflicts including a code of ethics and policies which govern the investment adviser’s trading practices, including among other things the aggregation and allocation of trades among clients, brokerage allocations, cross trades and best execution.

Compensation Structure for EVM

Compensation of EVM’s portfolio managers and other investment professionals has three primary components: (1) a base salary, (2) an annual cash bonus, and (3) annual stock-based compensation consisting of options to purchase shares of Eaton Vance Corp.’s (“EVC’s”) nonvoting common stock and restricted shares of EVC’s nonvoting common stock. EVM’s investment professionals also receive certain retirement, insurance and other benefits that are broadly available to EVM’s employees. Compensation of EVM’s investment professionals is reviewed primarily on an annual basis. Cash bonuses, stock-based compensation awards, and adjustments in base salary are typically paid or put into effect at or shortly after the October 31st fiscal year end of EVC.

Method to Determine Compensation. EVM compensates its portfolio managers based primarily on the scale and complexity of their portfolio responsibilities and the total return performance of managed funds and accounts versus the benchmark(s) stated in the prospectus, as well as an appropriate peer group (as described below). In addition to rankings within peer groups of funds on the basis of absolute performance, consideration may also be given to relative risk-adjusted performance. Risk-adjusted performance measures include, but are not limited to, the Sharpe ratio (Sharpe ratio uses standard deviation and excess return to determine reward per unit of risk). Performance is normally based on periods ending on the September 30th preceding fiscal year end. Fund performance is normally evaluated primarily versus peer groups of funds as determined by Lipper Inc. and/or Morningstar, Inc. When a fund’s peer group as determined by Lipper or Morningstar is deemed by EVM’s management not to provide a fair comparison, performance may instead be evaluated primarily against

a custom peer group or market index. In evaluating the performance of a fund and its manager, primary emphasis is normally placed on three-year performance, with secondary consideration of performance over longer and shorter periods. A portion of the compensation payable to equity portfolio managers and investment professionals will be determined based on the ability of one or more accounts managed by such manager to achieve a specified target average annual gross return over a three year period in excess of the account benchmark. The cash bonus to be payable at the end of the three year term will be established at the inception of the term and will be adjusted positively or negatively to the extent that the average annual gross return varies from the specified target return. For funds that are tax-managed or otherwise have an objective of after-tax returns, performance is measured net of taxes. For other funds, performance is evaluated on a pre-tax basis. For funds with an investment objective other than total return (such as current income), consideration will also be given to the fund’s success in achieving its objective. For managers responsible for multiple funds and accounts, investment performance is evaluated on an aggregate basis, based on averages or weighted averages among managed funds and accounts. Funds and accounts that have performance-based advisory fees are not accorded disproportionate weightings in measuring aggregate portfolio manager performance.

The compensation of portfolio managers with other job responsibilities (such as heading an investment group or providing analytical support to other portfolios) will include consideration of the scope of such responsibilities and the managers’ performance in meeting them.

EVM seeks to compensate portfolio managers commensurate with their responsibilities and performance, and competitive with other firms within the investment management industry. EVM participates in investment-industry compensation surveys and utilizes survey data as a factor in determining salary, bonus and stock-based compensation levels for portfolio managers and other investment professionals. Salaries, bonuses and stock-based compensation are also influenced by the operating performance of EVM and its parent company. The overall annual cash bonus pool is generally based on a substantially fixed percentage of pre-bonus adjusted operating income. While the salaries of EVM’s portfolio managers are comparatively fixed, cash bonuses and stock-based compensation may fluctuate significantly from year to year, based on changes in manager performance and other factors as described herein. For a high performing portfolio manager, cash bonuses and stock-based compensation may represent a substantial portion of total compensation.

Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers

No such purchases this period.

Item 10. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

No material changes.

Item 11. Controls and Procedures

(a) It is the conclusion of the registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer that the effectiveness of the registrant’s current disclosure controls and procedures (such disclosure controls and procedures having been evaluated within 90 days of the date of this filing) provide reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed by the registrant has been recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time period specified in the Commission’s rules and forms and that the information required to be disclosed by the registrant has been accumulated and communicated to the registrant’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer in order to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

(b) There have been no changes in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting during the second fiscal quarter of the period covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Item 12. Exhibits


(a)(1)		Registrant’s Code of Ethics – Not applicable (please see Item 2).

(a)(2)(i)		Treasurer’s Section 302 certification.

(a)(2)(ii)		President’s Section 302 certification.

(b)		Combined Section 906 certification.

Signatures

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund


By:		/s/ Payson F. Swaffield
		Payson F. Swaffield
		President

Date:		November 17, 2016

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.


By:		/s/ James F. Kirchner
		James F. Kirchner
		Treasurer

Date:		November 17, 2016

By:		/s/ Payson F. Swaffield
		Payson F. Swaffield
		President

Date:		November 17, 2016