Start with the positive: Some items in the bill have widespread support and reflect the industry’s maturation. For instance, the bill finally eliminates a requirement that medical marijuana companies grow and manufacture the products they sell. That requirement doesn’t apply to recreational businesses and limits competition in the medical market by keeping smaller businesses out.

Separately, increasing limits on how much marijuana customers can buy and lifting a ban on offering and advertising sales or discounted products are steps toward treating cannabis businesses similarly to other retail.

Somewhat more controversially, the bill would also make big changes to the Cannabis Control Commission, the dysfunctional state body charged with regulating the industry. As this board has argued, infighting between commissioners and staff, which led to the firing and reinstatement of commission Chair Shannon O’Brien, highlighted the need for more clarity about the role of commissioners versus the commission’s staff.

There must also be a clear line of accountability between the commission and the officials who appoint the commissioners — which were until now the governor, treasurer, and attorney general.

The conference committee’s bill would put the commission squarely under the governor’s responsibility by making her the sole appointing authority. It also seeks to better define the roles of commission chair and executive director.

One potential problem with the new structure, though, is that it shrinks the commission from five to three members, a model based on the commission that oversees the alcohol industry. Under the open meeting law, a majority of a public body can’t discuss public business outside a properly advertised public meeting. With a three-person body, two commissioners can’t talk to each other privately about cannabis-related business, which could limit the commission’s effectiveness.

The bill also risks eliminating some expertise from the commission, since it will no longer require that seats be designated for people with backgrounds in public health, public safety, or corporate or industry management. The only requirement it maintains is one commissioner must have a social justice background. The Legislature shouldn’t be afraid to reopen the question of the commission’s structure if the three-commissioner model doesn’t work out.

Another area that carries some risk is the decision to lift the cap on how many licenses one company can own from three to six. The industry was split on this proposal. Lifting the license cap is expected to let big companies — particularly multistate operators — grow bigger, potentially squeezing smaller companies out of the market.

But the change could also give smaller companies more opportunities to sell a struggling business or to expand and achieve economies of scale. If the cap is lifted, policy makers should track the impacts to make sure small companies, including social equity companies owned by people from communities disproportionately affected by prior enforcement of drug laws, can remain competitive.

The bill also defers important issues. As this board wrote, there is a problem with struggling marijuana companies failing to pay suppliers. The bill authorizes the creation of a “delinquency” list, so companies that owe money for more than 60 days would be required to pay cash on delivery. But that provision wouldn’t become effective until Jan. 1, 2028. The timing would give businesses time to pay their bills and the commission time to set up infrastructure to create and adjudicate a list — but it also makes the provision essentially meaningless until 2028.

The legislation would also create commissions to study issues related to cannabis, including how to regulate hemp-derived cannabinoids, intoxicating products that fall in a legal gray area. The federal government is moving toward banning many of these products.

Once it becomes clear what the federal government will do, the state should fill in any regulatory gaps to ensure intoxicating products are sold only to adults, with appropriate labeling and testing so consumers know what they are buying.

If the bill becomes law, the governor should act swiftly to appoint commissioners with knowledge of the cannabis industry, management experience, and integrity who can hit the ground running. The commission is poised to begin approving licenses for cannabis cafes and event spaces. Marijuana prices are dropping due to oversupply. Issues of potential misconduct — whether testing fraud or the importation of out-of-state products — need investigation. The next commission will have important work to accomplish.

---

Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us @GlobeOpinion.