Bakersfield, CA vs Oakland, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Oakland, CA outspends Bakersfield, CA by a wide margin per resident — $30,055 versus $11,576, a 160% 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 Bakersfield, CA — 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. Their budgets diverge on where the largest per-resident dollars go: Bakersfield, CA leads with parks and recreation at $741 per resident, while Oakland, CA leads with health at $1,016.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 100% of total revenue in Bakersfield, CA and 100% in Oakland, CA.
Summary
Oakland spends 61.5% more per capita than Bakersfield ($18,479/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)
| Property Tax | $1 | $0 |
| Sales Tax | $20 | $522 |
| Income Tax | $1,909 | $0 |
| Intergovernmental | $3,862 | $42,277 |
| Charges & Fees | $1,024 | $0 |
| Other | $1,915 | $4,337 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $0 | $1 |
| Public Welfare | $840 | $2,426 |
| Health | $0 | $1,016 |
| Hospitals | $425 | $2,498 |
| Parks & Recreation | $741 | $955 |
| Housing | $3,391 | $7,811 |
| Sewerage | $265 | $1,417 |
| Utilities | $2,679 | $0 |
| Other | $3,234 | $13,929 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.