The Shepherdstown Planning Commission had its first meeting discussing an urban growth boundary (UGB) in November.

Four months later and still no boundary, the commission has decided to draft a map of what the UGB could look like and meet with citizens and answer their questions. A public hearing will come later.

In The Chronicle’s Dec. 24 editorial, we charged the town with resolutions for the new year. Defining and urban growth boundary was one of them.

At Monday’s commission meeting, we think Commissioner David Rosen hit the nail on the head when he said the town needs to communicate a clear message to residents about what this boundary could mean for the municipality and how it affects its relationship with the county.

Speaking of the county, the planning commission invited county officials to its November meeting to further educate the group of UGBs.

But some questions remain unanswered.

Commissioners and residents in attendance at the meeting had concerns about what a “memorandum of understanding” between the county and town would involve and if annexing non-contiguous lands was possible under state code.

The Chronicle hopes that while the town effectively communicates its position of a UGB to the town and welcomes residents’ input, we also charge the county with answering any questions Shepherdstown may have.

This UGB relationship is a two-way street.