Portland, OR vs Omaha, NE
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Portland, OR outspends Omaha, NE by a wide margin per resident — $23,675 versus $11,180, a 112% 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 63/100 (grade C) for Portland, OR — a 27-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Omaha, NE reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Portland, OR carries $1,574 per resident. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Portland, OR at $2,477 per resident and in Omaha, NE at $742.
They also fund themselves differently: intergovernmental transfers is the largest single revenue source in Portland, OR at 19% of total revenue, whereas Omaha, NE relies most on other revenue at 17%.
Summary
Portland spends 111.8% more per capita than Omaha ($12,495/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 | $0 | $624 |
| Sales Tax | $1,695 | $373 |
| Income Tax | $130 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $8,979 | $2,622 |
| Charges & Fees | $3,883 | $0 |
| Other | $7,916 | $4,672 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $1,700 | $0 |
| Highways & Roads | $139 | $319 |
| Public Welfare | $3,607 | $1,521 |
| Health | $0 | $456 |
| Hospitals | $2,893 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $2,477 | $742 |
| Housing | $3,694 | $3,045 |
| Sewerage | $630 | $0 |
| Utilities | $1,845 | $581 |
| Other | $6,689 | $4,516 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.