Title

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

Employees

273

Agencies

31

Average Base Salary

$206,266.51

Total Payroll

$167,431,206.41

Agencies Using This Title

  1. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION

    30 employees, $11,974,285.39 total payroll

  2. POLICE DEPARTMENT

    27 employees, $15,852,850.48 total payroll

  3. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS SERV.

    21 employees, $10,789,703.25 total payroll

  4. FIRE DEPARTMENT

    18 employees, $14,014,817.45 total payroll

  5. DEPT OF ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION

    17 employees, $10,936,311.46 total payroll

  6. DEPT OF CITYWIDE ADMIN SVCS

    17 employees, $9,060,737.15 total payroll

  7. DEPT OF HEALTH/MENTAL HYGIENE

    16 employees, $10,006,111.13 total payroll

  8. HOUSING PRESERVATION & DVLPMNT

    14 employees, $8,388,925.42 total payroll

  9. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

    11 employees, $7,190,256.66 total payroll

  10. ADMIN FOR CHILDREN'S SVCS

    11 employees, $5,655,772.91 total payroll

  11. Police Department

    11 employees, $1,606,383.63 total payroll

  12. HRA/DEPT OF SOCIAL SERVICES

    10 employees, $3,764,778.86 total payroll

  13. DEPT OF INFO TECH & TELECOMM

    10 employees, $2,457,340.72 total payroll

  14. DEPT OF PARKS & RECREATION

    9 employees, $11,091,629.19 total payroll

  15. DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE

    9 employees, $9,183,052.41 total payroll

  16. OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

    8 employees, $3,610,761.36 total payroll

  17. DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION

    7 employees, $7,903,442.89 total payroll

  18. DEPT OF YOUTH & COMM DEV SRVS

    6 employees, $5,831,657.11 total payroll

  19. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS

    6 employees, $4,271,910.86 total payroll

  20. DEPARTMENT OF INVESTIGATION

    5 employees, $3,506,871.00 total payroll

Pay Summary

Rows
1,011
Average total compensation
$165,609.50
First fiscal year
2014
Last fiscal year
2025

Top Earners By Year

Fiscal Year 2019

  1. JOHN J MILLER

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $235,510.85

  2. PHILLIP T WALZAK

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $233,186.42

  3. LORENZO N CIPOLLINA

    DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION • $230,795.74

  4. ROSEMARIE MALDONADO

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $230,530.74

  5. JAMES C DESIMONE

    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • $228,259.68

Fiscal Year 2018

  1. DANIEL A SHACKNAI

    HOUSING PRESERVATION & DVLPMNT • $223,898.02

  2. JOHN J MILLER

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $223,838.16

  3. LAWRENCE BYRNE

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $223,838.16

  4. OXIRIS BARBOT

    DEPT OF HEALTH/MENTAL HYGIENE • $221,100.62

  5. ROSEMARIE MALDONADO

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $219,105.12

Fiscal Year 2017

  1. LAWRENCE BYRNE

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $232,498.54

  2. DANIEL A SHACKNAI

    HOUSING PRESERVATION & DVLPMNT • $229,479.65

  3. JOHN J MILLER

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $228,357.34

  4. STEPHEN DAVIS

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $228,357.34

  5. OXIRIS BARBOT

    DEPT OF HEALTH/MENTAL HYGIENE • $228,140.70

Fiscal Year 2016

  1. DANIEL A SHACKNAI

    HOUSING PRESERVATION & DVLPMNT • $216,217.93

  2. ROBERT F SWEENEY

    FIRE DEPARTMENT • $213,100.25

  3. OXIRIS BARBOT

    DEPT OF HEALTH/MENTAL HYGIENE • $212,967.38

  4. JOHN J MILLER

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $211,045.76

  5. STEPHEN DAVIS

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $211,045.76

Fiscal Year 2015

  1. LORI A ARDITO

    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • $223,304.67

  2. JAMES C DESIMONE

    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • $216,337.79

  3. LORENZO N CIPOLLINA

    DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION • $215,333.91

  4. ROBERT ORLIN

    DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION • $214,833.91

  5. VINCENT D GRIPPO

    POLICE DEPARTMENT • $213,879.45

Fiscal Year 2014

  1. DANIEL A SHACKNAI

    FIRE DEPARTMENT • $202,446.69

  2. LORI A ARDITO

    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • $201,945.12

  3. DOUGLASS MAYNARD

    Police Department • $200,433.47

  4. JAMES C DESIMONE

    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION • $196,070.41

  5. LORENZO N CIPOLLINA

    DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION • $195,554.08

Source and Caveats

Source for v1: NYC Open Data dataset k397-673e. Raw source rows are preserved as imported.

OT hours before FY2023 are not directly comparable to FY2023 and later because the source methodology changed. Some names, agencies, and other fields may be redacted in the source and are displayed as provided.