Tulsa, OK vs Chicago, IL
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Chicago, IL outspends Tulsa, OK by a wide margin per resident — $34,551 versus $5,250, a 558% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Chicago, IL edges Tulsa, OK on the Fiscal Health Score by 5 points — 61/100 (grade C) to 56/100 (grade C). At a margin this narrow the grade is close enough that the factor-level detail matters more than the composite.
Tulsa, OK 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: Tulsa, OK leads with health at $762 per resident, while Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754.
Summary
Chicago spends 84.8% more per capita than Tulsa ($29,301/person difference). Chicago, IL has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (C, 61/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $0 | $26 |
| Sales Tax | $97 | $74 |
| Income Tax | $0 | $229 |
| Intergovernmental | $0 | $85,083 |
| Charges & Fees | $0 | $2,847 |
| Other | $53 | $3,463 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $628 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $196 | $10,754 |
| Highways & Roads | $257 | $930 |
| Public Welfare | $86 | $1,858 |
| Health | $762 | $426 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $1,444 |
| Parks & Recreation | $154 | $122 |
| Housing | $350 | $6,520 |
| Sewerage | $27 | $129 |
| Utilities | $41 | $2,983 |
| Other | $2,748 | $9,385 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.