Atlanta, GA vs Omaha, NE
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Atlanta, GA outspends Omaha, NE by a wide margin per resident — $25,457 versus $11,180, a 128% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Omaha, NE edges Atlanta, GA on the Fiscal Health Score by 5 points — 90/100 (grade A) to 85/100 (grade A). At a margin this narrow the grade is close enough that the factor-level detail matters more than the composite.
Neither city reports outstanding debt per resident in its current Census filing, which removes debt service as a point of difference between them. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Atlanta, GA at $1,274 per resident and in Omaha, NE at $742.
They also fund themselves differently: intergovernmental transfers is the largest single revenue source in Atlanta, GA at 6% of total revenue, whereas Omaha, NE relies most on other revenue at 17%.
Summary
Atlanta spends 127.7% more per capita than Omaha ($14,277/person difference). Omaha, NE has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (A, 90/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $419 | $624 |
| Sales Tax | $0 | $373 |
| Income Tax | $1,292 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $9,121 | $2,622 |
| Charges & Fees | $5,645 | $0 |
| Other | $5,461 | $4,672 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $315 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $464 | $0 |
| Highways & Roads | $513 | $319 |
| Education | $25 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,587 | $1,521 |
| Health | $0 | $456 |
| Hospitals | $55 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,274 | $742 |
| Housing | $4,594 | $3,045 |
| Sewerage | $343 | $0 |
| Utilities | $8,026 | $581 |
| Other | $8,262 | $4,516 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.