Omaha, NE vs Tucson, AZ
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Tucson, AZ spends 41% more per resident than Omaha, NE: $15,759 against $11,180. That gap is large enough to show up across most functional budget categories below.
Omaha, NE holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 90/100 (grade A) against 55/100 (grade C) for Tucson, AZ — a 35-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Omaha, NE reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Tucson, AZ carries $1,540 per resident. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Omaha, NE at $742 per resident and in Tucson, AZ at $1,229.
They also fund themselves differently: other revenue is the largest single revenue source in Omaha, NE at 17% of total revenue, whereas Tucson, AZ relies most on intergovernmental transfers at 100%.
Summary
Tucson spends 29.1% more per capita than Omaha ($4,579/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 | $5 |
| Sales Tax | $373 | $309 |
| Income Tax | $0 | $1,107 |
| Intergovernmental | $2,622 | $23,276 |
| Charges & Fees | $0 | $4,534 |
| Other | $4,672 | $952 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $0 | $330 |
| Highways & Roads | $319 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,521 | $1,181 |
| Health | $456 | $0 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $1,314 |
| Parks & Recreation | $742 | $1,229 |
| Housing | $3,045 | $3,091 |
| Utilities | $581 | $3,555 |
| Interest on Debt | $0 | $1,735 |
| Other | $4,516 | $3,322 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.