Omaha, NE vs Los Angeles, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Los Angeles, CA outspends Omaha, NE by a wide margin per resident — $85,432 versus $11,180, a 664% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Omaha, NE 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.
Neither city reports outstanding debt per resident in its current Census filing, which removes debt service as a point of difference between them. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Omaha, NE leads with parks and recreation at $742 per resident, while Los Angeles, CA leads with police at $4,111.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on other revenue — 17% of total revenue in Omaha, NE and 51% in Los Angeles, CA.
Summary
Los Angeles spends 86.9% more per capita than Omaha ($74,252/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 | $624 | $64 |
| Sales Tax | $373 | $77 |
| Income Tax | $0 | $307 |
| Intergovernmental | $2,622 | $134 |
| Charges & Fees | $0 | $459 |
| Other | $4,672 | $9,048 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $0 | $4,111 |
| Fire Protection | $0 | $1,057 |
| Highways & Roads | $319 | $503 |
| Education | $0 | $829 |
| Public Welfare | $1,521 | $1,286 |
| Health | $456 | $409 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $2,135 |
| Parks & Recreation | $742 | $1,347 |
| Housing | $3,045 | $6,325 |
| Sewerage | $0 | $34 |
| Utilities | $581 | $21,992 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $630 |
| General Admin | $0 | $11,586 |
| Other | $4,516 | $33,189 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.