CBC News has learned a city councillor will not take part on any future votes regarding a matter in his ward after the city's new ethics advisor told him he risked violating — or appearing to violate — the ethical code of conduct for council members.

The concern is that Ward 9 Coun. Gian-Carlo Carra was potentially taking an active part in a policy issue which could be seen to financially benefit him personally because of a property he's involved with in Inglewood.

In March, Carra put a motion before city council regarding the Airport Vicinity Protection Area (AVPA). That's a provincial regulation which limits residential development along airport flight paths.

He asked council to direct the city to do a public consultation on whether Inglewood should be exempted from the terms of the AVPA.

If there's public support, the city would then ask the provincial government to allow greater re-development in the inner-city community.

At the time, Carra advised city council that he was 'pursuing a development' in Inglewood affected by the AVPA.

He said he had obtained a legal opinion that he did not have a pecuniary [financial] interest in the city taking action on the AVPA exemption because any change would affect much of Inglewood.

Council passed the motion. A report on the results of the consultation will come back to city council this fall.

Carra's future home

In an interview with CBC News, Carra provided details about his property interest in Inglewood. The property currently has a duplex on it, but there's a proposal by the owner to replace the building with two infills.

Carra says he has an agreement with the owner to purchase one of those houses. He then intends to develop a secondary suite in his new house.

There's a problem with his plan. The AVPA prohibits any intensification on the property and the application is stalled.

The owner of the property recently submitted a development permit. But it's stalled because of the AVPA restrictions.

The city sent letters to 1,000 property owners in Inglewood last month, alerting them that they cannot apply for secondary suites because of the AVPA.

Your participation would create the risk that you would violate, or would appear to violate, the provisions of the Ethical Conduct Policy for Members of Council - Alice Woolley, ethics advisor

Carra decided to consult with the city's recently-appointed ethics advisor, Alice Woolley, about his involvement.

She declined to comment for this story but Carra did release a letter she sent to him.

In it, she stated that Carra's interest in a property which would be affected by council's discussion about the AVPA should preclude him from being personally involved.

"Your participation would create the risk that you would violate, or would appear to violate, the provisions of the Ethical Conduct Policy for Members of Council," wrote Woolley.

She advised Carra to provide Mayor Naheed Nenshi with the details of the development permit application and then he can decide how to proceed with any questions to the city about it.

Woolley also advised Carra to seek updated advice if council considers any policy issues related to how the AVPA applies to Inglewood.

Carra has agreed to follow the guidance

While he plans to continue representing the community on the AVPA issue as councillor for the area, he agrees he should not take part in any votes because of the appearance of a conflict of interest.

"I definitely understand that, which is why I'm stepping back from advocating. You've got to understand, the removal of the AVPA is not a decision that I get to make. It's a decision that the province makes," said Carra.

"Where I've stepped back is when I'm directly affected and I have to play the role of advocate to the administration. I'm not doing that anymore. It's been handed over to the mayor's office."

Mayor Naheed Nenshi sees no contradiction between Carra's decision to bring forward the motion in March and now deciding to step back from the issue.

"The MGA [Municipal Government Act] is very clear on this. If you share an interest with everyone in the community, you do not have a pecuniary interest," said Nenshi.

"However, he's been moving forward with a specific development permit on property that he would like to build on and because he himself is moving forward with that, the situation has changed a little bit."

That said, the mayor sees nothing wrong with being prudent. "To be a little more cautious about it is probably a smart thing to do."

Ethics advisor beneficial

Politicial scientist Lori Williams said this incident shows council's decision to appoint an ethics advisor is paying off in terms of preventing troubles for city council.

The professor at Mount Royal University points out a lawyer can offer a legal opinion regarding the MGA.

But that advice may not cover the ethics of a situation or potential political controversies for an elected official.

"The fact of the matter is had the rule change been accomplished, he [Carra] would have financially benefited from it," said Williams.

"To vote as a councillor on this matter would put him in a position where he has access to influence that ordinary citizens do not so probably, it would be best if he didn't participate in the vote."

She points out there was potential risk to the project and Carra's reputation if he didn't pull back.

"Trying to undo damage once it's done is much more difficult to manage than preventing even the appearance of impropriety from happening in the first place," said Williams.