Chicago, IL vs Bakersfield, CA
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: Chicago, IL leads with fire protection at $10,754 per resident, while Bakersfield, CA leads with parks and recreation at $741.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 100% of total revenue in Chicago, IL and 100% in Bakersfield, CA.
Summary
Chicago spends 198.5% 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 | $26 | $1 |
| Sales Tax | $74 | $20 |
| Income Tax | $229 | $1,909 |
| Intergovernmental | $85,083 | $3,862 |
| Charges & Fees | $2,847 | $1,024 |
| Other | $3,463 | $1,915 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $10,754 | $0 |
| Highways & Roads | $930 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,858 | $840 |
| Health | $426 | $0 |
| Hospitals | $1,444 | $425 |
| Parks & Recreation | $122 | $741 |
| Housing | $6,520 | $3,391 |
| Sewerage | $129 | $265 |
| Utilities | $2,983 | $2,679 |
| Other | $9,385 | $3,234 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.