Birmingham, AL vs Tuscaloosa, AL
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Birmingham, AL outspends Tuscaloosa, AL by a wide margin per resident — $30,790 versus $10,894, a 183% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
On the CitySpend Fiscal Health Score the two are level: Birmingham, AL and Tuscaloosa, AL both land at 55/100 (grade C and C respectively), so the deciding factors sit in the underlying six-factor breakdown rather than the rolled-up grade.
Tuscaloosa, AL reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Birmingham, AL carries $2,823 per resident. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Birmingham, AL leads with parks and recreation at $1,823 per resident, while Tuscaloosa, AL leads with police at $1,260.
Summary
Birmingham spends 182.6% more per capita than Tuscaloosa ($19,896/person difference). Both cities share the same Fiscal Health Score.
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $44 | $2 |
| Sales Tax | $281 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $468 | $0 |
| Charges & Fees | $10,460 | $0 |
| Other | $734 | $791 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $22 | $1,260 |
| Fire Protection | $1,152 | $1,043 |
| Highways & Roads | $848 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $2,110 | $2,419 |
| Health | $683 | $540 |
| Hospitals | $1,505 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,823 | $375 |
| Housing | $5,487 | $1,916 |
| Sewerage | $594 | $0 |
| Utilities | $5,451 | $88 |
| Other | $11,115 | $3,252 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.