San Jose, CA vs Chicago, IL
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Chicago, IL outspends San Jose, CA by a wide margin per resident — $34,551 versus $17,934, a 93% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
San Jose, CA holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 90/100 (grade A) against 61/100 (grade C) for Chicago, IL — a 29-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
San Jose, CA reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Chicago, IL carries $977 per resident. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: San Jose, CA leads with parks and recreation at $1,424 per resident, while Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754.
They also fund themselves differently: other revenue is the largest single revenue source in San Jose, CA at 9% of total revenue, whereas Chicago, IL relies most on intergovernmental transfers at 100%.
Summary
Chicago spends 48.1% more per capita than San Jose ($16,617/person difference). San Jose, CA 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 | $40 | $26 |
| Sales Tax | $315 | $74 |
| Income Tax | $1,935 | $229 |
| Intergovernmental | $2,680 | $85,083 |
| Charges & Fees | $608 | $2,847 |
| Other | $3,519 | $3,463 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $0 | $10,754 |
| Highways & Roads | $0 | $930 |
| Public Welfare | $810 | $1,858 |
| Health | $609 | $426 |
| Hospitals | $1,254 | $1,444 |
| Parks & Recreation | $1,424 | $122 |
| Housing | $4,897 | $6,520 |
| Sewerage | $161 | $129 |
| Utilities | $2,533 | $2,983 |
| Other | $6,247 | $9,385 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.