The City Council plans no further disciplinary action against Councilman Ikaika Anderson, Chairman Ernie Martin said, after the Ethics Commission publicly scolded Anderson for misusing his office in trying to obtain special parking privileges and threatening retaliation against parking office employees.

Anderson apologized Tuesday for an incident that happened in December 2010, but denied seeking special treatment or making threats.

The Ethics Commission said in a news release it believed publication of its advisory opinion and Anderson’s misconduct was sufficient punishment, leaving it up to the Council for any further punishment.

Martin, in a statement issued through his office, said no further action would be taken and blamed the incident on "tension" between the City Council and the city adminstration.

"The December 2010 incident that precipitated the Ethics Commission’s investigation of Councilman Anderson is indicative of the tension that has existed between the executive and legislative branch for quite some time," Martin said. "The Department of Facility Maintenance rules are strictly enforced without exceptions."

He added that the 10-page opinion issued at taxpayer expense does little to resolve the underlying tension.

"A more productive course of action would have been for the DFM complaint to have been brought to the Council chair’s attention for remedial action, which would have, at a minimum, resulted in a counseling session and subsequent apology from Councilman Anderson to the affected employees, just as he expressed his regrets over the incident and apologies to those employees today," Martin said.

Messages left with a city spokesman were not immediately returned Tuesday.

The Ethics Commission said Anderson violated city ethics law prohibiting favoritism or special treatment.

"He knew or should have known that he was using the authority of his city position to intimidate the parking office personnel with legislation that office personnel had opposed and that may affect their jobs," the commission said.

According to the commission, the incident occurred Dec. 22, 2010, when Anderson went to the parking office about a parking violation warning he was issued for letting a visitor park in his assigned, reserved stall, and for parking his own car in an undesignated area.

"Councilman Anderson addressed the parking office employees in a loud and threatening voice," according to the commission. "He said that since he pays for the assigned stall, he can do what he wants with it including trading stalls with other council members and having guests park there. He stated that the warnings and rule enforcement were ‘baloney’ and that these warnings from the parking office need to stop, otherwise he will bring back Bill 62 and ‘we’ll see what happens to your job.’"

Anderson had previously introduced Bill 62, which would have transferred oversight of the parking office to the City Council chairman for Council parking.

In a statement, Anderson said he had allowed a constituent who was meeting with him to park in his reserved stall. Meanwhile, a staff member parked Anderson’s car in the assigned stall of another Council member, which resulted in that member eventually parking in Anderson’s stall. Anderson said the parking office asked to speak with him about the warning he received.

"In light of the circumstances — the limited public parking available for my constituent due to Honolulu City Lights, an honest mistake resulting in my car and a colleague’s car being inadvertently parked in one another’s stalls, and the fact that I pay a monthly fee for use of the stall — I was understandably frustrated," Anderson said, adding that the meeting resulted in a "verbal exchange with an employee."

"No threats of any kind were made nor did I use any profane or vulgar language," he said. "Nonetheless, I do regret the incident and sincerely apologize for its occurrence."

Chuck Totto, executive director and legal counsel for the Ethics Commission, said, "City officials are held to the highest standards of ethical conduct so that the public may have trust and confidence in the integrity of city government. Although this may seem like a relatively small matter, it is important for the public and city employees to know that high-ranking government officials may not use their position to give themselves or anyone else favored treatment."