Seattle, WA vs Bakersfield, CA
Side-by-side fiscal comparison · U.S. Census Bureau data (2023)
Seattle, WA outspends Bakersfield, CA by a wide margin per resident — $34,463 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.
Seattle, WA 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 Seattle, WA carries $1,100 per resident. Both cities pour the most per-resident dollars into the same function: parks and recreation leads in Seattle, WA at $3,923 per resident and in Bakersfield, CA at $741.
On the revenue side both lean hardest on intergovernmental transfers — 13% of total revenue in Seattle, WA and 100% in Bakersfield, CA.
Summary
Seattle spends 197.7% more per capita than Bakersfield ($22,887/person difference). Seattle, WA 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 | $1,831 | $1 |
| Sales Tax | $1,094 | $20 |
| Income Tax | $3,496 | $1,909 |
| Intergovernmental | $9,846 | $3,862 |
| Charges & Fees | $3,960 | $1,024 |
| Other | $8,544 | $1,915 |
Spending Breakdown (Per Capita)
| Fire Protection | $210 | $0 |
| Education | $1,461 | $0 |
| Public Welfare | $3,439 | $840 |
| Health | $1,131 | $0 |
| Hospitals | $1,871 | $425 |
| Parks & Recreation | $3,923 | $741 |
| Housing | $3,727 | $3,391 |
| Sewerage | $952 | $265 |
| Utilities | $6,489 | $2,679 |
| Other | $11,260 | $3,234 |
Compare More Cities
Source: Census Annual Survey of State and Local Government Finances, 2026.