Bakersfield, CA vs Chicago, IL
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Chicago, IL outspends Bakersfield, CA by a wide margin per resident — $34,551 versus $11,576, a 198% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Chicago, IL edges Bakersfield, CA 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.
Bakersfield, 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: Bakersfield, CA leads with parks and recreation at $741 per resident, while Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 100% of total revenue in Bakersfield, CA and 100% in Chicago, IL.
Summary
Chicago spends 66.5% more per capita than Bakersfield ($22,976/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 | $1 | $26 |
| Sales Tax | $20 | $74 |
| Income Tax | $1,909 | $229 |
| Intergovernmental | $3,862 | $85,083 |
| Charges & Fees | $1,024 | $2,847 |
| Other | $1,915 | $3,463 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $0 | $10,754 |
| Highways & Roads | $0 | $930 |
| Public Welfare | $840 | $1,858 |
| Health | $0 | $426 |
| Hospitals | $425 | $1,444 |
| Parks & Recreation | $741 | $122 |
| Housing | $3,391 | $6,520 |
| Sewerage | $265 | $129 |
| Utilities | $2,679 | $2,983 |
| Other | $3,234 | $9,385 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.