A newly released study by personal finance site WalletHub paints a grim picture for California’s major cities, with San Francisco ranking dead last among the 148 most populous U.S. cities in terms of governance.
The June 17 report evaluates cities based on six key performance indicators: financial stability, education, health, safety, economy, infrastructure, and pollution.
To determine the rankings, WalletHub averaged scores across all six service categories to derive a “quality of city services” score. That figure was then divided by each city’s budget per capita, aiming to reveal which municipalities deliver the best bang for the taxpayer’s buck.
The results were unequivocal: California dominates the bottom of the list, with six of the 10 worst-run cities located in the Golden State.
Among them:
-
San Francisco (No. 148) — Worst overall
-
Oakland (No. 146)
-
Fresno (No. 141)
-
Long Beach (No. 140)
-
Los Angeles (No. 139)
-
Stockton (No. 138)
Other major cities like San Jose (No. 127), Sacramento (No. 126), and Anaheim (No. 121) also fared poorly, suggesting a systemic challenge for governance across California’s urban landscape.
The only California city that broke into the top half of the rankings was Huntington Beach, coming in at No. 34. Impressively, it topped the nation for “quality of city services”, though its higher cost per capita kept it from entering the top 10 overall.
In contrast, the top of the list was dominated by smaller, well-managed cities in states like Utah, Idaho, and New Hampshire:
-
Provo, Utah
-
Nampa, Idaho
-
Manchester, New Hampshire
-
Boise, Idaho
-
Nashua, New Hampshire
-
Dover, Delaware
-
Sioux Falls, South Dakota
-
Lincoln, Nebraska
-
Virginia Beach, Virginia
-
Fort Wayne, Indiana
As cities like San Francisco continue to struggle with runaway budgets, public dissatisfaction, and declining livability, WalletHub’s data provides fresh fuel for ongoing debates about how taxpayer money is managed — and whether residents are truly getting what they pay for.
