After years of debate, the Los Angeles City Council will consider a measure today that would effectively single out Wal-Mart and make it prove that opening a superstore selling groceries and merchandise would not economically harm neighborhoods where stores would be located.

The council on Tuesday approved a committee report on the proposal, which would require developers to pay for an analysis on whether a superstore would eliminate jobs, reduce wages or impact neighborhood businesses.

The ordinance would apply to large stores that sell general merchandise and groceries but warehouse clubs -- such as Costco or Sam's Club -- would be exempt, so Wal-Mart would be the only business affected.

"What we are doing is giving flexibility to communities to determine what should be in the neighborhoods," said Councilman Eric Garcetti, who has been pushing the proposal. "We don't have to choose between low prices and decent wages. ... We've invested too much in developing good jobs in Los Angeles to let these questions go unanswered."

Los Angeles officials dropped plans for an outright ban on such stores, faced with the prospect of legal challenges or even an election. Earlier this year, Inglewood voters rejected a measure that would have allowed Wal-Mart to skip some steps in the planning process.

Mayor James Hahn said he supports the City Council proposal as a way to determine if a proposed store would help the city.

"The standard is simple: Is it a net gain to the community or not?" Hahn said. "This ordinance would ensure that a superstore project would add to a neighborhood's economy and quality of life, not detract from them."

Wal-Mart representative Peter Kanelos, who previously called the ordinance "redundant," today hailed it as better than an outright ban.

"Wal-Mart intends to continue to reduce costs for Los Angeles consumers," he said, and to "create jobs in the city and contribute to the community."

City News Service contributed to this report.