EX-99

                       Report of Independent Auditors


To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of
Dreyfus Florida Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund

In  planning  and performing our audit of the financial statements  of  Dreyfus
Florida Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund for the year ended December 31,  2003,
we   considered   its  internal  control,  including  control  activities   for
safeguarding securities, in order to determine our auditing procedures for  the
purpose  of  expressing our opinion on the financial statements and  to  comply
with  the  requirements  of Form N-SAR, not to provide  assurance  on  internal
control.

The  management  of  Dreyfus  Florida  Intermediate  Municipal  Bond  Fund   is
responsible  for establishing and maintaining internal control.  In  fulfilling
this  responsibility,  estimates and judgments by management  are  required  to
assess  the  expected  benefits  and related  costs  of  controls.   Generally,
controls  that  are relevant to an audit pertain to the entity's  objective  of
preparing  financial statements for external purposes that are fairly presented
in  conformity  with  accounting principles generally accepted  in  the  United
States.  Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against unauthorized
acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because  of inherent limitations in internal control, error or fraud may  occur
and not be detected.  Also, projection of any evaluation of internal control to
future periods is subject to the risk that it may become inadequate because  of
changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation may
deteriorate.

Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily disclose all matters
in   internal  control  that  might  be  material  weaknesses  under  standards
established  by  the  American  Institute of Certified  Public  Accountants.  A
material  weakness is a condition in which the design or operation  of  one  or
more  of  the  internal control components does not reduce to a relatively  low
level  the  risk  that misstatements caused by error or fraud in  amounts  that
would  be  material in relation to the financial statements being  audited  may
occur  and  not be detected within a timely period by employees in  the  normal
course  of  performing their assigned functions.  However, we noted no  matters
involving   internal  control  and  its  operation,  including   controls   for
safeguarding securities, that we consider to be material weaknesses as  defined
above as of December 31, 2003.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of management and the
Board  of Trustees of Dreyfus Florida Intermediate Municipal Bond Fund and  the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not intended to be and should not  be
used by anyone other than these specified parties.


                                       ERNST & YOUNG LLP

New York, New York
February 11, 2004

EX-99

                      SUB ITEM 77E - LEGAL PROCEEDINGS



On January 30, 2004, a purported shareholder in the Dreyfus Disciplined Stock
Fund  filed a class action in the United States District Court of the Western
District  of Pennsylvania against Mellon Financial Corporation, Mellon  Bank,
N.A.,  The  Dreyfus  Corporation, Founders  Asset  Management  LLC,  and  the
directors  of all or substantially all of the Dreyfus Funds and  the  Dreyfus
Founders Funds, on behalf of a purported class and derivatively on behalf  of
said  funds, alleging violations of Sections 34(b), 36(b), and 48(a)  of  the
Investment Company Act of 1940, Section 215 of the Investment Advisers Act of
1940,  and common law claims.  The action seeks to recover allegedly improper
and  excessive  Rule  12b-1 and advisory fees charged to  various  funds  for
marketing  and  distribution  services.   More  specifically,  the  Plaintiff
claims,  among  other  things, that 12b-1 fees and  directed  brokerage  were
improperly  used  to  pay brokers to recommend Dreyfus and  Dreyfus  Founders
Funds  over  other  funds,  and  that such payments  were  not  disclosed  to
investors.  In addition, Plaintiff asserts that economies of scale and  soft-
dollar  benefits were not passed on to investors.  Plaintiff further  alleges
that  12b-1  fees charged to certain funds that were closed to new  investors
were  also  improper. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive  damages,
recission  of  the advisory contracts, an accounting and restitution  of  any
lawful  fees,  as well as an award of attorneys' fees and litigation.   These
actions  will be defended vigorously, and we believe they are totally without
merit.