Several similar cases are still winding their way through courts across Massachusetts, where the battle over community impact fees has become a thorny sticking point inside the cannabis industry. Many businesses allege that towns are still charging them fees unfairly, years after regulators banned the practice, in an era where the marijuana market is already unstable and short on cash.

Similar lawsuits in Pittsfield, Haverhill, and Uxbridge concluded without involvement from the Commission, often with a portion of the fees returned to the cannabis company.

Now withits motion in Great Barrington, the CCC argues that it oversees all host community agreements — contracts between companies and towns that dictate the fees — and that the town‘s position “directly attacks the Commission’s statutory and regulatory authority.”

David Rich, an attorney with Todd & Weld who represents the three marijuana companies in the lawsuit, said he “welcomes” the CCC into the legal battle.

“We believe that the intervention request is a demonstration that the body that is charged with enforcing and regulating these laws believes that the manner in which Great Barrington is purporting to interpret these regulations is wrong,” he said.

Officials in Great Barrington opposed the CCC’s request to intervene in a Wednesday memo where they said regulators’ arguments were not enough to “justify … intervention by the Commission.”

Peter Most, a commercial litigation lawyer in Great Barrington who has written extensively about host community agreements, said he was “disappointed” in the town’s response.

“For the Town of Great Barrington to seek to oppose the CCC’s participation is like telling a court to ignore Betty Crocker’s advice on how to follow one of her own recipes,” he said.

Diti Kohli can be reached at diti.kohli@globe.com. Follow her @ditikohli_.