Omaha, NE vs San Francisco, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Summary
San Francisco spends 93.9% more per capita than Omaha ($172,951/person difference). Omaha, NE has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (A, 90/100).
Fiscal Health Score
A
90/100
Budget Balance100
Debt Burden100
Pension Funding76
Spending Efficiency100
Revenue Diversity100
Trend Direction50
D
48/100
Budget Balance70
Debt Burden0
Pension Funding76
Spending Efficiency0
Revenue Diversity100
Trend Direction50
Key Metrics
Metric
Omaha
San Francisco
Total Spending
$5.5B
$156.7B
Spending / Capita
$11,180
$184,131
Total Revenue
$13.2B
$232.3B
Revenue / Capita
$26,929
$272,907
Total Debt
$0
$1.7B
Debt / Capita
$0
$2,031
Population
489,201
851,036
Gov Employees / 10K
0.0
0.0
Avg Gov Salary
$0
$0
Per Capita Spending by Department
Police
Omaha$0
San Francisco$3,351
Fire Protection
Omaha$0
San Francisco$2,281
Highways & Roads
Omaha$319
San Francisco$0
Parks & Recreation
Omaha$742
San Francisco$4,119
Health
Omaha$456
San Francisco$1,911
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
OmahaSan Francisco
| Property Tax | $624 | $148 |
| Sales Tax | $373 | $3,028 |
| Income Tax | $0 | $269 |
| Intergovernmental | $2,622 | $19,762 |
| Charges & Fees | $0 | $7,961 |
| Other | $4,672 | $18,918 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
OmahaSan Francisco
| Police | $0 | $3,351 |
| Fire Protection | $0 | $2,281 |
| Highways & Roads | $319 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,521 | $2,203 |
| Health | $456 | $1,911 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $6,939 |
| Parks & Recreation | $742 | $4,119 |
| Housing | $3,045 | $9,315 |
| Sewerage | $0 | $1,423 |
| Utilities | $581 | $21,190 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $22,798 |
| General Admin | $0 | $14,899 |
| Other | $4,516 | $93,702 |
A
Omaha, NE
Fiscal Health Score: 90/100
Excellent fiscal health
D
San Francisco, CA
Fiscal Health Score: 48/100
Below average fiscal health