DELAWARE GROUP TAX FREE FUND
Delaware Tax-Free USA Fund
Delaware Tax-Free USA Intermediate Fund

VOYAGEUR INSURED FUNDS
Delaware Tax-Free Arizona Fund

VOYAGEUR INTERMEDIATE TAX FREE FUNDS
Delaware Tax-Free Minnesota Intermediate Fund

VOYAGEUR MUTUAL FUNDS
Delaware Minnesota High-Yield Municipal Bond Fund
Delaware National High-Yield Municipal Bond Fund
Delaware Tax-Free California Fund
Delaware Tax-Free Idaho Fund
Delaware Tax-Free New York Fund

VOYAGEUR MUTUAL FUNDS II
Delaware Tax-Free Colorado Fund

VOYAGEUR TAX FREE FUNDS
Delaware Tax-Free Minnesota Fund

(each, a "Fund" and collectively, the "Funds")

Supplement to the Funds' Statement of Additional Information
dated December 28, 2007

This Supplement supersedes the supplement dated April 23, 2008. The information included under the "Insurance" section of the Funds' Statement of Additional Information is replaced in its entirety with the following:

Financial Health of Municipal Bond Insurance Companies

About one half of the $2.6 trillion in outstanding U.S. municipal bonds are "wrapped" with a municipal bond insurance policy from one of several "monoline" financial guarantors. The municipal financial guaranty business began in 1971 when Ambac Indemnity Corporation ("Ambac") began underwriting bond insurance policies for municipalities. MBIA Insurance Corp. ("MBIA") began underwriting bond insurance policies in 1973. The insurance policies of Ambac and MBIA received the highest quality insurer financial strength ratings of AAA from Moody's, S&P, and Fitch, Inc. ("Fitch"). Over time a total of five other monoline firms - Assured Guaranty Corp. ("Assured Guaranty"), CIFG Assurance North America ("CIFG"), Financial Guaranty Insurance Co. ("FGIC"), Financial Security Assurance, Inc. ("FSA"), and XL Capital Assurance, Inc. ("XLCA") - entered the financial guaranty business, offering insurance policies that were rated AAA by all t hree rating agencies. Two specialty "second tier" monolines, Radian Asset Assurance, Inc. ("Radian") and ACA Financial Guaranty Corp. ("ACA"), offer insurance policies with insurer financial strength and claims paying resources that are rated at less than AAA.

Over the past several years, several financial guarantors expanded their business lines to include the writing of insurance policies and credit default swap contracts for structured finance, which includes residential mortgage backed securities ("RMBS") and collateralized debt obligations ("CDOs") that contain both sub-prime and prime mortgages and home equity lines of credit ("HELOCs"). The structured finance portion of the financial guarantors accounted for about one third of the $2.5 trillion in insured par values.

The national housing slowdown and the widespread decline of home prices that began in 2006 triggered a significant increase in mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures, especially in the sub-prime mortgage sector. The rate of delinquencies and foreclosures greatly exceeded historical averages, especially for sub-prime mortgages and HELOCs that were underwritten in 2006 and 2007 as underwriting standards declined. During the summer and fall of 2007, all but two of the seven "first tier" or AAA-rated financial guarantors began to report sharp increases in their mark-to-market losses associated with the credit default swap contracts for insured RMBS and CDO exposure. The monoline insurers also began to set aside case loss reserves for future expected monetary losses associated with the payment of future claims in their structured finance portfolios. With the rise in delinquencies and weaker performance in mortgage pools, and CDOs with sub-prime exposure, the three rating agencies developed updates of thei r capital adequacy models for the financial guarantors. Extensive revisions to the capital models were completed in the second half of 2007. The revised capital models projected that future cumulative losses from sub-prime mortgages, HELOCs, and CDOs with sub-prime exposure would eat into the excess capital reserves that are necessary for the monoline insurers to maintain a AAA insurer financial strength rating. All three rating agencies disclosed that several of the monoline insurers would experience capital shortfalls that would require new capital infusions and risk reduction measures or else the insurer financial strength rating for the monoline insurers would be downgraded to below AAA.

In response to the higher loss expectations in structured finance, several of the monoline insurers including Ambac, MBIA, Assured Guaranty, and CIFG have announced or completed plans to raise additional capital and claims paying resources. Starting in January 2008, the three rating agencies began to take negative actions against a number of the municipal bond insurers. These actions included actual rating downgrades, assigning negative outlooks, and/or placing the insurer financial strength rating on credit watch for possible downgrade. Through early April 2008, five of the seven first-tier monoline insurers have been downgraded by one or more of the rating agencies. Only two financial guarantors, Assured Guaranty and FSA have insurer financial strength ratings affirmed at AAA from all three rating agencies. In December 2007, a new monoline bond insurer, Berkshire Hathaway Assurance Corp. (BHAC), started to insure municipal bonds. BHAC is rated Aaa by Moody's and AAA by S&P. It is not rated by Fitch. (Sources: various reports and press releases by Moody's, S&P, and Fitch.)

Funds' Investment in Insured Bonds

The Manager anticipates that substantially all of the insured municipal obligations in the Funds' investment portfolios will be covered by either primary insurance or secondary market insurance. Primary insurance is a municipal bond insurance policy that is attached to a municipal bond at the time the bond is first sold in the primary market ("Primary Insurance"). Secondary market insurance is a municipal bond insurance policy that is underwritten for a bond that has been previously issued and sold ("Secondary Market Insurance"). Both Primary Insurance and Secondary Market Insurance are non-cancelable and continue in force so long as the insured security is outstanding and the respective insurer remains in business. Premiums for Secondary Market Insurance, if any, would be paid from a Fund's assets and would reduce the current yield on its investment portfolio by the amount of such premiums.

Insurer financial strength ratings are provided by Moody's, S&P, and Fitch. A Moody's insurance insurer financial strength rating is an opinion of the ability of an insurance company to repay punctually senior policyholder obligations and claims. An insurer with an insurer financial strength rating of Aaa is adjudged by Moody's to be of the best quality. In the opinion of Moody's, the policy obligations of an insurance company with an insurer financial strength ratio of Aaa carry the smallest degree of credit risk and, while the financial strength of these companies is likely to change, such changes as can be visualized are most unlikely to impair the company's fundamentally strong position. An S&P insurer financial strength, financial enhancement rating is an assessment of an operating insurance company's financial capacity to meet obligations under an insurance policy in accordance with its terms. An insurer with an insurer financial strength, financial enhancement rating o f AAA has the highest rating assigned by S&P. The capacity of an insurer so rated to honor insurance contracts is adjudged by S&P to be extremely strong and highly likely to remain so over a long period of time. A Fitch Insurer Financial Strength ("IFS") rating provides an assessment of the financial strength of an insurance company and its capacity to meet senior obligations to policyholders and contract holders on a timely basis. Insurers that are assigned a AAA IFS rating by Fitch are viewed as possessing exceptionally strong capacity to meet policyholder and contract obligations. For such companies, risk factors are minimal and the impact of any adverse business and economic factors are expected to be extremely small.

An insurer financial strength rating by Moody's, S&P, or Fitch does not constitute an opinion on any specific insurance contract in that such an opinion can only be rendered upon the review of the specific insurance contract. Furthermore, an insurer financial strength rating does not take into account deductibles, surrender or cancellation penalties or the timeliness of payment; nor does it address the ability of a company to meet non-policy obligations (i.e., debt contracts).

The assignment of ratings by Moody's, S&P, or Fitch to debt issues that are fully or partially supported by insurance policies, contracts or guarantees is a separate process from the determination of insurance financial strength ratings. The likelihood of a timely flow of funds from the insurer to the trustee for the bondholders is a likely element in the rating determination for such debt issues.

As of June 9, 2008, each of Assured Guaranty and FSA has insurance financial strength ratings of Aaa from Moody's, AAA from S&P, and AAA from Fitch. Ambac and MBIA have insurer financial strength ratings of Aaa from Moody's, but are rated AA by Fitch and S&P. BHAC is rated Aaa by Moody's and AAA by S&P. Insurer financial strength ratings for the municipal bond insurers may continue to change. Ambac has received a letter ruling from the Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") that holds in effect that insurance proceeds representing maturing interest on defaulted municipal obligations paid by Ambac to municipal bond funds substantially similar to the Funds, under policy provisions substantially identical to those contained in its municipal bond insurance policy, will be excludable from federal gross income under Section 103(a) of the Code.

None of Ambac, MBIA, FSA, BHAC, or Assured Guaranty or any affiliate thereof, has any material business relationship, direct or indirect, with the Funds.

This Supplement is dated June 11, 2008.