SEC Form N-CSR filed by Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

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)

Deidre E. Walsh

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, 2023

Date of Reporting Period

Item 1. Reports to Stockholders

---

Eaton Vance

National Municipal Opportunities Trust (EOT)

Semiannual Report

September 30, 2023

---

Table of Contents

Eaton Vance

National Municipal Opportunities Trust

September 30, 2023

Fund Profile

---

Credit Quality (% of total investments)1,2

Footnotes:

1

For purposes of the Fund’s rating restrictions, ratings are based on Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. (“Moody’s”), S&P Global Ratings (“S&P”) or Fitch Ratings (“Fitch”), as applicable. If securities are rated differently by the ratings agencies, the highest 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” (if any) are not rated by the national ratings agencies stated above.

2

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

3

Item 2. Code of Ethics

The registrant (sometimes referred to as the “Fund”) 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 of Trustees (the “Board”) has designated George J. Gorman and Scott E. Wennerholm, each an independent trustee, as audit committee financial experts. Mr. Gorman is a certified public accountant who is the Principal at George J. Gorman LLC (a consulting firm). Previously, Mr. Gorman served in various capacities at Ernst & Young LLP (a registered public accounting firm), including as Senior Partner. Mr. Gorman also has experience serving as an independent trustee and audit committee financial expert of other mutual fund complexes. Mr. Wennerholm is a private investor. Previously, Mr. Wennerholm served as a Trustee at Wheelock College (postsecondary institution), as a Consultant at GF Parish Group (executive recruiting firm), Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice President at BNY Mellon Asset Management (investment management firm), Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer at Natixis Global Asset Management (investment management firm), and Vice President at Fidelity Investments Institutional Services (investment management firm).

Item 4. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

(a) –(d)

The following table presents the aggregate fees billed to the registrant for the registrant’s fiscal years ended September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023 by the registrant’s principal accountant, Deloitte & Touche LLP (“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.

(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, 2022 and September 30, 2023; 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.

(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.

(i) Not applicable.

(j) Not applicable.

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. George J. Gorman, Keith Quinton, Scott E. Wennerholm (Chair), and Nancy A. Wiser 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 the Fund 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 Policies annually. 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, or any committee, sub-committee or group of independent trustees identified by the Board, which will instruct the investment adviser on the appropriate course of action. If the Board Members are unable to meet and the failure to vote a proxy would have a material adverse impact on the Fund, the investment adviser may vote such proxy, provided that it discloses the existence of the material conflict to the Chairperson of the Fund’s Board as soon as practicable and to the Board at its next meeting.

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 in accordance with customized proxy voting guidelines (the “Guidelines”) and/or refer them back to the investment adviser pursuant to the Policies.

The Agent is required to establish and maintain adequate internal controls and policies in connection with the provision of proxy voting services, including methods to reasonably ensure that its analysis and recommendations are not influenced by a conflict of interest. The Guidelines include voting guidelines for matters relating to, among other things, the election of directors, approval of independent auditors, executive compensation, corporate structure and anti-takeover defenses. The investment adviser may cause the Fund to abstain from voting from time to time where it determines that the costs associated with voting a proxy outweigh the benefits derived from exercising the right to vote or it is unable to access or access timely ballots or other proxy information, among other stated reasons. The Agent will refer Fund proxies to the investment adviser for instructions under circumstances where, among others: (1) the application of the Guidelines is unclear; (2) a particular proxy question is not covered by the Guidelines; or (3) the Guidelines require input from the investment adviser. When a proxy voting issue has been referred to the investment adviser, the analyst (or portfolio manager if applicable) covering the company subject to the proxy proposal determines the final vote (or decision not to vote) and the investment adviser’s Proxy Administrator (described below) instructs the Agent to vote accordingly for securities held by the Fund. Where more than one analyst covers a particular company and the recommendations of such analysts voting a proposal conflict, the investment adviser’s Global Proxy Group (described below) will review such recommendations and any other available information related to the proposal and determine the manner in which it should be voted, which may result in different recommendations for the Fund that may differ from other clients of the investment adviser.

The investment adviser has appointed a Proxy Administrator to assist in the coordination of the voting of client proxies (including the Fund’s) in accordance with the Guidelines and the Policies. The investment adviser and its affiliates have also established a Global Proxy Group. The Global Proxy Group develops the investment adviser’s positions on all major corporate issues, creates the Guidelines and oversees the proxy voting process. The Proxy Administrator maintains a record of all proxy questions that have been referred by the Agent, all applicable recommendations, analysis and research received and any resolution of the matter. Before instructing the Agent to vote contrary to the Guidelines or the recommendation of the Agent, the Proxy Administrator will provide the Global Proxy Group with the Agent’s recommendation for the proposal along with any other relevant materials, including the basis for the analyst’s recommendation. The Proxy Administrator will then instruct the Agent to vote the proxy in the manner determined by the Global Proxy Group. A similar process will be followed if the Agent has a conflict of interest with respect to a proxy. The investment adviser will report to the Fund’s Board any votes cast contrary to the Guidelines or Agent recommendations, as applicable, no less than annually.

The investment adviser’s Global Proxy Group is responsible for monitoring and resolving possible material conflicts with respect to proxy voting. Because the Guidelines are predetermined and designed to be in the best interests of shareholders, application of the Guidelines to vote client proxies should, in most cases, adequately address any possible conflict of interest. The investment adviser will monitor situations that may result in a conflict of interest between any of its clients and the investment adviser or any of its affiliates by maintaining a list of significant existing and prospective corporate clients. The Proxy Administrator will compare such list with the names of companies of which he or she has been referred a proxy statement (the “Proxy Companies”). If a company on the list is also a Proxy Company, the Proxy Administrator will report that fact to the Global Proxy Group. If the Proxy Administrator intends to instruct the Agent to vote in a manner inconsistent with the Guidelines, the Global Proxy Group will first determine, in consultation with legal counsel if necessary, whether a material conflict exists. If it is determined that a material conflict exists, the investment adviser will seek instruction on how the proxy should be voted from the Fund’s Board, or any committee or subcommittee identified by the Board. If a matter is referred to the Global Proxy Group, the decision made and basis for the decision will be documented by the Proxy Administrator and/or Global Proxy Group.

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. Cynthia J. Clemson and Julie P. Callahan, CFA are the portfolio managers of Eaton Vance Municipal Bond Fund. Christopher J. Eustance, CFA and Paul Metheny, CFA are the portfolio managers of Eaton Vance New York Municipal Bond Fund. Trevor G. Smith and Carl Thompson, CFA are the portfolio managers of Eaton Vance California Municipal Bond Fund. Each portfolio manager is a Vice President of EVM and also manages other Eaton Vance portfolios. Ms. Clemson and Messrs. Brandon, Eustance, Metheny, Smith and Thompson have been members of the Eaton Vance organization for more than five years. Ms. Callahan has been a Vice President of EVM since September 2021 and has been a Managing Director at Morgan Stanley Investment Management Inc. (“MSIM”), an affiliate of EVM, since 2020. Prior to joining MSIM, she was a senior member of the municipal bond portfolio management team at PIMCO from 2011 to 2020. This information is provided as of the date of filing 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.

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.

Potential for Conflicts of Interest. It is possible that conflicts of interest may arise in connection with a portfolio manager’s management of the Fund’s investments on the one hand and the 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 Fund and other accounts he or she advises. In addition, due to differences in the investment strategies or restrictions between the Fund and the other accounts, the portfolio manager may take action with respect to another account that differs from the action taken with respect to the Fund. 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 the portfolio manager in the allocation of management time, resources and investment opportunities. Whenever conflicts of interest arise, the 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 that 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

The compensation structure of Eaton Vance and its affiliates that are investment advisers (for purposes of this section “Eaton Vance”) is based on a total reward system of base salary and incentive compensation, which is paid either in the form of cash bonus, or for employees meeting the specified deferred compensation eligibility threshold, partially as a cash bonus and partially as mandatory deferred compensation. Deferred compensation granted to Eaton Vance employees is generally granted as a mix of deferred cash awards under the Investment Management Alignment Plan (IMAP) and equity-based awards in the form of stock units. The portion of incentive compensation granted in the form of a deferred compensation award and the terms of such awards are determined annually by the Compensation, Management Development and Succession Committee of Morgan Stanley.

Base salary compensation. Generally, portfolio managers receive base salary compensation based on the level of their position with the adviser.

Incentive compensation. In addition to base compensation, portfolio managers may receive discretionary year-end compensation. Incentive compensation may include:

Eaton Vance compensates employees based on principles of pay-for-performance, market competitiveness and risk management. Eligibility for, and the amount of any, discretionary compensation is subject to a multi-dimensional process. Specifically, consideration is given to one or more of the following factors, which can vary by portfolio management team and circumstances:

Further, the firm’s Global Incentive Compensation Discretion Policy requires compensation managers to consider Further the only legitimate, business related factors when exercising discretion in determining variable incentive compensation, including adherence to Morgan Stanley’s core values, conduct, disciplinary actions in the current performance year, risk management and risk outcomes.

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 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. Disclosure of Securities Lending Activities for Closed-End Management Investment Companies

No activity to report for the registrant’s most recent fiscal year end.

Item 13. Exhibits

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.

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.