San Francisco, CA vs Omaha, NE
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Summary
San Francisco spends 1547.0% more per capita than Omaha ($172,951/person difference). Omaha, NE has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (A, 90/100).
Fiscal Health Score
D
48/100
Budget Balance70
Debt Burden0
Pension Funding76
Spending Efficiency0
Revenue Diversity100
Trend Direction50
A
90/100
Budget Balance100
Debt Burden100
Pension Funding76
Spending Efficiency100
Revenue Diversity100
Trend Direction50
Key Metrics
Metric
San Francisco
Omaha
Total Spending
$156.7B
$5.5B
Spending / Capita
$184,131
$11,180
Total Revenue
$232.3B
$13.2B
Revenue / Capita
$272,907
$26,929
Total Debt
$1.7B
$0
Debt / Capita
$2,031
$0
Population
851,036
489,201
Gov Employees / 10K
0.0
0.0
Avg Gov Salary
$0
$0
Per Capita Spending by Department
Police
San Francisco$3,351
Omaha$0
Fire Protection
San Francisco$2,281
Omaha$0
Highways & Roads
San Francisco$0
Omaha$319
Parks & Recreation
San Francisco$4,119
Omaha$742
Health
San Francisco$1,911
Omaha$456
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
San FranciscoOmaha
| Property Tax | $148 | $624 |
| Sales Tax | $3,028 | $373 |
| Income Tax | $269 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $19,762 | $2,622 |
| Charges & Fees | $7,961 | $0 |
| Other | $18,918 | $4,672 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
San FranciscoOmaha
| Police | $3,351 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $2,281 | $0 |
| Highways & Roads | $0 | $319 |
| Public Welfare | $2,203 | $1,521 |
| Health | $1,911 | $456 |
| Hospitals | $6,939 | $0 |
| Parks & Recreation | $4,119 | $742 |
| Housing | $9,315 | $3,045 |
| Sewerage | $1,423 | $0 |
| Utilities | $21,190 | $581 |
| Interest on Debt | $22,798 | $0 |
| General Admin | $14,899 | $0 |
| Other | $93,702 | $4,516 |
D
San Francisco, CA
Fiscal Health Score: 48/100
Below average fiscal health
A
Omaha, NE
Fiscal Health Score: 90/100
Excellent fiscal health