Minneapolis, MN vs Bakersfield, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Minneapolis, MN outspends Bakersfield, CA by a wide margin per resident — $21,910 versus $11,576, a 89% difference. A gap this size usually reflects a structurally different service mix or accounting scope rather than a single line item.
Minneapolis, MN holds the stronger Fiscal Health Score, 65/100 (grade B) against 56/100 (grade C) for Bakersfield, CA — a 9-point spread that puts the two in different grade territory.
Bakersfield, CA reports no outstanding debt per resident in its Census filing, while Minneapolis, MN carries $644 per resident. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Minneapolis, MN at $3,486 per resident and in Bakersfield, CA at $741.
They also fund themselves differently: other revenue is the largest single revenue source in Minneapolis, MN at 17% of total revenue, whereas Bakersfield, CA relies most on intergovernmental transfers at 100%.
Summary
Minneapolis spends 89.3% more per capita than Bakersfield ($10,334/person difference). Minneapolis, MN has the stronger Fiscal Health Score (B, 65/100).
Fiscal Health Score
Key Metrics
Per Capita Spending by Department
Revenue Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Property Tax | $0 | $1 |
| Sales Tax | $1,989 | $20 |
| Income Tax | $994 | $1,909 |
| Intergovernmental | $2,929 | $3,862 |
| Charges & Fees | $2,040 | $1,024 |
| Other | $3,254 | $1,915 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $683 | $0 |
| Highways & Roads | $221 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $1,500 | $840 |
| Hospitals | $0 | $425 |
| Parks & Recreation | $3,486 | $741 |
| Housing | $4,133 | $3,391 |
| Sewerage | $570 | $265 |
| Utilities | $2,398 | $2,679 |
| Other | $8,919 | $3,234 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.