On Beacon Hill, there’s been some smoke about changes to the state’s cannabis regulator. But will this lead to fire?

 Last week, a Massachusetts House committee moved legislation seeking to restructure the state’s Cannabis Control Commission. The agency has been a source of controversy in recent years for internal strife and its slow pace in making regulatory changes. The state’s inspector general even called it a “rudderless agency.”

 Chris Lisinski, a reporter with State House News Service in Boston outlined some of the aspects of the proposal.

Chris Lisinski, SHNS: They’re basically trying to change how many members are on this commission and who has the authority for appointing it. Right now, it’s a five member body. Appointments are made by the governor, attorney general and treasurer. And the treasurer picks the chair of this panel. That’s key if anyone is following the long running feud between Cannabis Control Commission Chair Shannon O’Brien and Treasurer Deborah Goldberg.

The bill that the House is trying to advance or the representatives are trying to advance, rather, would shrink that to three commissioners only, all of whom would be appointed by the governor, including the chair. So it’d be a smaller panel, much more focused on being appointed by the corner office, by the executive branch.

 Adam Frenier, NEPM: And, Chris, the legislation is also looking to increase the number of cannabis business licenses an owner can hold from three to six. Some current retailers say the smaller cap makes it harder for them to sell, while others are concerned about large, out-of-state outfits dominating the Massachusetts market. What are you hearing on this?

 Yeah, there’s there’s really mixed input coming the house’s way as they move to reform not just the makeup of the commission, but the specific ways the industry operates. The commission itself is avoiding taking a position, not lobbying for or against, but a lot of business leaders have raised alarms and argued that the way that this is written would harm, in particular smaller distributors here in Massachusetts from previously disadvantaged communities.

 And finally, on this one, the bill still needs to wind its way through the House. Have we heard anything from the Senate on similar legislation?

 No, we really haven’t. Reforming the cannabis commission has been a priority for House Speaker Ron Mariano for at least a few months now. It’s a topic that is clearly on the agenda for Beacon Hill as a whole.

 As you noted, there were hearings last year. The inspector general made a really urgent call for reform. But so far, I haven’t heard any Senate, top Senate Democrats, lodging the same kinds of complaints or voicing the same kind of urgency.

 As we shift gears, also last week, the Healey administration announced many regulatory changes intended at making things easier on businesses in the state. Some are substantial, like removing a requirement that banks and insurance companies file documents on paper. Others are more mundane, such as eliminating the need for barbers to have the traditional pole outside their shops. Will this make it easier for businesses to operate in Massachusetts, or is this just a bit of window dressing?

 I think it’s probably somewhere in between those two.

 You know, I don’t really see this as a dramatic change to the way that business is done in Massachusetts, but it does have support from some pretty influential business groups like Retailers Association of Massachusetts, who have long called for cutting red tape. So, I think it is viewed by by many in the industry, many who would be most affected by these changes as a first step toward streamlining and a first step toward increasing efficiency, if not a substantial transformation.

Lastly, Chris, the Massachusetts State Lottery remains in a slump, with sales well behind last year’s pace. With the lottery an important source of revenue, especially for local aid and a tight budget expected for the next fiscal year, is there any concern from lawmakers on this?

 I would say that there’s always concern whenever a revenue source is underperforming, but I don’t think lawmakers are all that focused on the lottery, if only because almost every revenue source is underperforming right now.

 The only one that is doing really well is the surtax that voters approved. All of the money from that has to go toward education and transportation. So slow lottery sales, I would say, for Beacon Hill, are just one part of an overall pretty cloudy, pretty concerning picture.