Tulsa, OK vs Oakland, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Oakland, CA outspends Tulsa, OK by a wide margin per resident — $30,055 versus $5,250, a 472% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Oakland, CA holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 72/100 (grade B) against 56/100 (grade C) for Tulsa, OK — a 16-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Neither city reports outstanding debt per resident in its current Census filing, which removes debt service as a point of difference between them. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: health leads in Tulsa, OK at $762 per resident and in Oakland, CA at $1,016.
Summary
Oakland spends 82.5% more per capita than Tulsa ($24,804/person difference). Oakland, CA has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (B, 72/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Sales Tax | $97 | $522 |
| Intergovernmental | $0 | $42,277 |
| Other | $53 | $4,337 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Police | $628 | $0 |
| Fire Protection | $196 | $1 |
| Highways & Roads | $257 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $86 | $2,426 |
| Health | $762 | $1,016 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $2,498 |
| Parks & Recreation | $154 | $955 |
| Housing | $350 | $7,811 |
| Sewerage | $27 | $1,417 |
| Utilities | $41 | $0 |
| Other | $2,748 | $13,929 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.