MuniSpot Research | March 10, 2026
debt-and-obligations pension-liabilities opeb muniscore rankings municipal-finance
Municipal financial stress rarely announces itself. Pension obligations pile up quietly over decades. Debt service crowds out spending on roads and public safety. Operating deficits persist year after year, covered by reserve drawdowns that don't appear in any headline. By the time a city makes the news, the warning signs have usually been sitting in the data for a long time.
MuniSpot tracks financial data for thousands of municipalities across the country. The MuniScore™ evaluates fiscal health across four factors: Economy, Budgetary Performance, Reserves & Flexibility, and Debt & Long-Term Obligations. This post ranks cities by the Debt & Long-Term Obligations factor, one of four factors that make up the overall MuniScore™, using fiscal year 2024 data.
Lower Debt & Long-Term Obligations scores mean heavier fiscal burden. A score of 1 to 25 signals serious concern. Scores between 25 and 50 reflect elevated risk. The 50 to 75 range is moderate, and above 75 is relatively healthy. Scores run on a 1–99 scale.
Methodology note: Rankings are based on the Debt & Long-Term Obligations factor of the MuniScore™. This factor accounts for 25% of the overall MuniScore™ and is the average of two metrics: (1) Debt Burden, which is bonded debt as a percentage of total governmental fund revenue, and (2) Pension & OPEB Burden, which is net pension liability (NPL) plus OPEB obligations combined, as a percentage of total governmental fund revenue. NPL and OPEB are scored together as a single metric, not separately. Cities often score poorly here because of pension and OPEB obligations rather than bonded debt. Cities with HIGH or MODERATE confidence ratings are included. Data is sourced from audited Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports. For the full scoring model, see the MuniScore™ methodology.
Bonded Debt vs. Pension Liabilities vs. OPEB: What's the Difference?
These three components of fiscal burden are related but distinct, and conflating them obscures what's actually driving a city's stress.
Bonded debt is money a city has borrowed and must repay on a fixed schedule: general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, and similar instruments. The amount owed is definite, the repayment terms are contractual, and the obligations are visible on the balance sheet. High bonded debt relative to revenue can reflect either genuine distress or deliberate investment in infrastructure, depending on context.
Net Pension Liability (NPL) is the gap between what a city has promised its employees in retirement benefits and the current value of the assets set aside to pay those promises. Unlike bonds, pensions are not borrowed money; they are earned compensation that was deferred. NPL grows when investment returns fall short of assumptions, when benefit formulas are generous, or when governments make contributions below the actuarially required level. Under GASB 68, cities have been required to show NPL on their balance sheets since 2015. For many cities in this ranking, NPL dwarfs bonded debt.
OPEB (Other Post-Employment Benefits) covers non-pension benefits promised to retirees, primarily retiree health insurance. Like pensions, these are earned obligations that accumulate over a worker's career and come due after retirement. OPEB liabilities are often less funded than pensions and less visible in public budget discussions.
In MuniSpot's scoring model, bonded debt and pension & OPEB obligations are evaluated as two separate metrics within the Debt & Long-Term Obligations factor. Both are measured as a percentage of total governmental fund revenue. The tables in this post show Debt-to-Revenue and NPL-to-Revenue as separate columns for transparency, but note that in the scoring model NPL and OPEB are combined into a single Pension & OPEB Burden metric, not scored individually.
Why We Measure Long-Term Obligations as a Percentage of Revenue
If you have seen municipal debt analysis before, you have probably noticed that debt is sometimes expressed relative to assessed property value, population, or local GDP. MuniSpot uses total governmental fund revenue as the denominator, and it is worth explaining why.
The core question in fiscal burden analysis is straightforward: can this government afford what it owes? The most direct way to answer that is to compare obligations to the actual money flowing through the funds responsible for paying them. Governmental fund revenue, which includes property taxes, sales taxes, intergovernmental transfers, and other general revenues. This is what a city actually uses to service its general obligation debt and fund pension contributions. It reflects realized income, not estimated capacity.
Alternatives have a comparability problem. Assessed property values vary dramatically across states depending on revaluation schedules, assessment ratios, and exemption policies. Two cities carrying identical debt loads could look very different under a debt-to-assessed-value comparison simply because one state assesses at 50% of market value and another at 100%. Revenue, reported under GASB standards, is consistent across jurisdictions.
Enterprise fund revenue is excluded deliberately. Water utilities, airports, and transit systems operate separately and back their own revenue bonds with their own income streams. Mixing those revenues into the denominator would inflate the base and make the governmental debt burden look smaller than it really is.
This approach is consistent with how credit analysts and municipal finance officers measure debt burden in practice. The Government Finance Officers Association recommends expressing GO debt limits as debt service relative to general fund revenues or expenditures. MuniSpot uses total governmental fund revenue rather than just the general fund, which captures all governmental revenue streams including special revenue funds, giving a more complete picture of the resources available to meet long-term obligations.
Revenue is what a city collects and controls. It's the most honest measure of fiscal capacity.
One important note before you read the numbers below: a high ratio does not mean a city is expected or required to pay off its long-term obligations in a single year. No one repays a 30-year mortgage in 12 months. The ratio simply expresses the size of the obligation relative to a consistent, comparable baseline. A city with an NPL-to-revenue ratio of 500% carries pension obligations worth five years of its total governmental revenues. That's a meaningful burden worth flagging, but it plays out over decades through annual contributions, investment returns, and benefit payments. Some of the ratios in this dataset are among the highest in our database of 14,000+ municipalities. We flag them not to alarm, but because the size of the obligation relative to revenue is precisely the information that matters for long-term fiscal planning.
Cities Under the Most Fiscal Burden (Score Below 25)
These cities carry the heaviest long-term obligations relative to their revenue. For most, pension liabilities are the primary driver, not bonded debt.
| Rank | City | State | Burden Score | Debt-to-Revenue (%) | NPL-to-Revenue (%) | Overall Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Town of Arcadia | NY | 1 | N/A | 510% | 60 |
| 2 | Town of Truckee | CA | 1 | N/A | 929% | 71 |
| 3 | Village of Mayville | MI | 1 | 825% | N/A | 43 |
| 4 | City of Brookville | OH | 1 | 1,110% | 743% | 64 |
| 5 | City of Antigo | WI | 1 | 3,215% | N/A | 47 |
| 6 | City of Peoria | AZ | 1 | 1,392% | N/A | 69 |
| 7 | City of Palestine | TX | 1 | 2,809% | N/A | 49 |
| 8 | City of Eloy | AZ | 1 | 1,148% | 1,138% | 55 |
| 9 | City of Duluth | GA | 1 | N/A | N/A | 70 |
| 10 | City of Sunland Park | NM | 1 | 2,406% | 25,302% | 59 |
| 11 | City of Sonora | CA | 1 | N/A | 1,015% | 42 |
| 12 | City of Bradenton | FL | 3 | N/A | 419% | 61 |
| 13 | City of Schertz | TX | 5 | 2,634% | 370% | 56 |
| 14 | City of New Plymouth | ID | 7 | 2,161% | 334% | 62 |
| 15 | City of Fullerton | CA | 12 | 336% | 9,054% | 53 |
| 16 | City of Bryan | TX | 15 | 434% | N/A | 52 |
| 17 | City of Austin | TX | 17 | 361% | 328% | 54 |
| 18 | City of Panama City | FL | 18 | 1,128% | 214% | 39 |
| 19 | City of Cathedral City | CA | 20 | 225% | 578% | 62 |
| 20 | City of Abbeville | LA | 23 | N/A | 266% | 44 |
Cities With Elevated Fiscal Burden (Score 25 to 50)
| Rank | City | State | Burden Score | Debt-to-Revenue (%) | NPL-to-Revenue (%) | Overall Score | Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | City of Oxford | OH | 25 | 153% | 587% | 63 | 22,270 |
| 22 | City of Lake Charles | LA | 26 | 152% | 593% | 67 | 85,771 |
| 23 | City of Fargo | ND | 29 | 276% | N/A | 49 | 134,513 |
| 24 | City of Noblesville | IN | 31 | 263% | N/A | 75 | 76,724 |
| 25 | City of Kettering | OH | 32 | 108% | 3,103% | 76 | 58,195 |
| 26 | City of Edinburg | TX | 34 | 244% | N/A | 34 | 109,440 |
| 27 | City of Massillon | OH | 35 | 93% | 433% | 53 | 32,195 |
| 28 | City of Port St. Lucie | FL | 35 | 91% | N/A | 59 | 227,001 |
| 29 | City of Santa Cruz | CA | 35 | 86% | 911% | 59 | 61,685 |
| 30 | City of Cape Coral | FL | 37 | 230% | N/A | 67 | 214,200 |
| 31 | City of Burleson | TX | 38 | 221% | N/A | 67 | 53,318 |
| 32 | City of Manchester | NH | 40 | 279% | 146% | 55 | 116,661 |
| 33 | Village of Oak Lawn | IL | 40 | 204% | 193% | 59 | 58,012 |
| 34 | City of Westminster | CA | 42 | N/A | 180% | 71 | 90,839 |
| 35 | City of Bend | OR | 43 | 193% | N/A | 70 | 107,346 |
| 36 | City of Rock Island | IL | 45 | 139% | 200% | 64 | 36,813 |
| 37 | City of Miami Beach | FL | 46 | 289% | 111% | 66 | 80,618 |
| 38 | City of Jacksonville | FL | 46 | N/A | 166% | 70 | 991,832 |
| 39 | City of Round Rock | TX | 47 | 171% | N/A | 76 | 127,095 |
| 40 | City of St. Joseph | MO | 47 | 166% | N/A | 64 | 70,892 |
| 41 | City of Tulare | CA | 48 | 431% | 66% | 59 | 72,631 |
| 42 | City of Pflugerville | TX | 49 | 771% | 11% | 68 | 70,694 |
How Large Cities Compare
Large cities tend to carry both heavier bonded debt and larger pension obligations, and the numbers reflect that. The table below shows each city's bonded debt-to-revenue and NPL-to-revenue separately so you can see which obligation is doing the heavy lifting. Scores span the full range, from Austin's deeply stressed 17 to Houston's healthy 76.
| City | State | Burden Score | Debt-to-Revenue (%) | NPL-to-Revenue (%) | Overall Score | Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| City of Austin | TX | 17 | 361% | 328% | 54 | 1,011,526 |
| City of Fargo | ND | 29 | 276% | N/A | 49 | 134,513 |
| City of Manchester | NH | 40 | 279% | 146% | 55 | 116,661 |
| City of Jacksonville | FL | 46 | N/A | 166% | 70 | 991,832 |
| City of St. Louis | MO | 50 | 80% | 237% | 74 | 292,127 |
| City of Columbus | OH | 51 | 255% | 96% | 62 | 939,147 |
| City of Lansing | MI | 52 | 153% | 136% | 54 | 112,525 |
| City of Bridgeport | CT | 60 | N/A | 122% | 36 | 149,054 |
| City of San Antonio | TX | 69 | 116% | 73% | 70 | 1,480,520 |
| City of Houston | TX | 76 | 115% | 35% | 66 | 2,356,126 |
Austin is the standout among large cities, with a Debt & Long-Term Obligations score of just 17. Its debt-to-revenue ratio of 361% and NPL-to-revenue of 328% drive that number down despite a strong local economy. The city scores well on the economy dimension (77) but its budgetary score sits at 1, pointing to persistent operating deficits alongside heavy capital borrowing.
What the Data Shows About Debt & Long-Term Obligations in 2024
The Pension Problem Is Usually Bigger Than the Bond Problem
In most financially stressed cities, bonded debt is not the main issue. It's the pension obligations. Net Pension Liability (NPL) plus Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) can dwarf a city's annual revenue, creating a structural long-term burden that rarely gets much attention in annual budget discussions.
A few examples from the data:
- Truckee, CA: NPL-to-revenue of 929%, meaning pension obligations are nearly 9 times annual revenue
- Fullerton, CA: NPL-to-revenue of 9,054%, roughly 91 times annual revenue, an extraordinary outlier driven by legacy defined-benefit obligations
- Kettering, OH: NPL-to-revenue of 3,103%, over 31 times annual revenue, despite a relatively solid overall score
Pension ratios at these levels usually reflect a combination of factors: defined-benefit plans with generous terms, investment return shortfalls, and years of contributions below the actuarially required amount. The obligation doesn't shrink just because the city underpaid. It compounds.
High Debt-to-Revenue Often Reflects Growth, Not Mismanagement
Cities with the highest raw debt-to-revenue ratios are not always the most fiscally troubled. Fast-growing Sun Belt cities like Peoria, AZ (1,392%), Schertz, TX (2,634%), and Pflugerville, TX (771%) carry heavy debt loads largely because they are financing infrastructure ahead of population growth. Borrowing to build roads, utilities, and parks in a rapidly expanding city is a different story from borrowing to cover operating deficits.
That's why the Debt & Long-Term Obligations factor doesn't just look at raw debt levels in isolation. Within the overall MuniScore™, it is weighed alongside Reserves & Flexibility, Economy, and Budgetary Performance to give a fuller picture. A city with high debt-to-revenue but strong reserves and a growing economy will score very differently from one with the same debt load but depleted fund balances and a shrinking tax base.
Operating Deficits Make Everything Worse
Cities with elevated long-term obligations that also run operating deficits are in the most precarious position. Edinburg, TX (operating margin of -119%) and Abbeville, LA (-515%) are spending dramatically more than they bring in. When you layer that on top of high debt, the path to stabilization gets much narrower.
How to Read the Debt & Long-Term Obligations Score
The Debt & Long-Term Obligations score (1–99) is one of four factor scores that make up the overall MuniScore™. It reflects a city's combined obligations burden relative to national peers, and is the simple average of two underlying metrics: Debt Burden and Pension & OPEB Burden. A low factor score can be driven by heavy bonded debt, large unfunded pension and OPEB obligations, or both.
The factor carries a 25% weight in the overall MuniScore™. The other three factors (Economy at 25%, Budgetary Performance at 10%, and Reserves & Flexibility at 40%) are why a city can post a low obligations score but still have a healthy overall MuniScore™. Reserves, in particular, carry the most weight at 40%, which is why cities with strong fund balances often score well overall despite heavy long-term obligations.
- 75–99: Low obligations burden, manageable relative to revenue
- 50–74: Moderate, worth monitoring, particularly pension & OPEB ratios
- 25–49: Elevated, high bonded debt and/or pension & OPEB obligations relative to revenue
- 1–24: High stress, long-term obligations are a serious fiscal concern
The overall MuniScore™ adds three more dimensions: Economy, Budgetary Performance, and Reserves & Flexibility. A city can score well overall while still having a poor Debt & Long-Term Obligations score, and vice versa. San Antonio is a good example: a Debt & Long-Term Obligations score of 69 but an overall MuniScore™ of 70, with bonded debt at 116% of revenue and NPL plus OPEB at 73%. Its moderate debt burden is offset by strong budgetary performance and solid reserves (which carry the heaviest weight at 40%).
Explore the Full Data on MuniSpot
The rankings above reflect cities with available 2024 fiscal year data. MuniSpot tracks financial data for over 14,000 municipalities, including cities, counties, school districts, and special districts across all 50 states.
Explore detailed financial dashboards for any U.S. city:
- City of Austin Financial Dashboard
- City of Fargo Financial Dashboard
- City of Fullerton Financial Dashboard
- City of Cape Coral Financial Dashboard
- City of Houston Financial Dashboard
Want to screen hundreds of cities by MuniScore™, obligations burden, pension liability, or operating margin? Start a free MuniSpot account
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Debt & Long-Term Obligations score? It is one of four factor scores that make up the MuniScore™, carrying a 25% weight. The factor averages two metrics: Debt Burden (bonded debt as a % of total governmental fund revenue) and Pension & OPEB Burden (NPL plus OPEB obligations combined as a % of revenue). Scores run 1–99; lower scores indicate heavier obligations relative to peers. For the full methodology, see munispot.com/methodology.
What data sources does MuniSpot use? MuniSpot aggregates audited Annual Comprehensive Financial Reports (ACFRs) published by municipalities, covering FY2016 through FY2024. Economic data comes from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey. All underlying data is audited or produced by federal agencies. Financial reporting follows standards set by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB).
What is net pension liability (NPL)? Net pension liability is the difference between a government's total pension obligation and the current value of pension assets. Under GASB Statement No. 68, municipalities are required to report NPL on their balance sheets. High NPL-to-revenue ratios indicate a city may struggle to meet future pension commitments.
What is an ACFR? An Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) is the official audited financial report published by state and local governments. It includes financial statements, notes, and statistical data about a government's finances.
Data reflects fiscal year 2024 audited financial reports. Rankings include cities with HIGH or MODERATE confidence ratings in MuniSpot's scoring model. For cities where population data was unavailable from the ACS, the field is omitted. All financial ratios are expressed as percentages. MuniSpot is not a financial advisor; this content is for informational and research purposes only.