Los Angeles, CA vs Mesa, AZ
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Los Angeles, CA outspends Mesa, AZ by a wide margin per resident — $85,432 versus $12,768, a 569% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Mesa, AZ holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 90/100 (grade A) against 47/100 (grade D) for Los Angeles, CA — a 43-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Los Angeles, CA reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Mesa, AZ carries $469 per resident. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Los Angeles, CA leads with police at $4,111 per resident, while Mesa, AZ leads with parks and recreation at $953.
They also fund themselves differently: other revenue is the largest single revenue source in Los Angeles, CA at 51% of total revenue, whereas Mesa, AZ relies most on charges and fees at 9%.
Summary
Los Angeles spends 569.1% more per capita than Mesa ($72,664/person difference). Mesa, AZ 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 | $64 | $47 |
| Sales Tax | $77 | $463 |
| Income Tax | $307 | $1,376 |
| Intergovernmental | $134 | $1,383 |
| Charges & Fees | $459 | $3,334 |
| Other | $9,048 | $2,253 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $4,111 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $1,057 | $422 |
| Highways & Roads | $503 | $192 |
| Education | $829 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,286 | $829 |
| Health | $409 | $147 |
| Hospitals | $2,135 | $537 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,347 | $953 |
| Housing | $6,325 | $4,190 |
| Sewerage | $34 | $38 |
| Utilities | $21,992 | $2,376 |
| Interest on Debt | $630 | $0 |
| General Admin | $11,586 | $0 |
| Other | $33,189 | $3,082 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.