The frustration felt by Selma citizens over the scourge of litter scattered across the streets of the city was palpable during Tuesday’s Public Works Committee meeting, evidenced by the harsh tones and loud voices many used in addressing the committee members.

Those tones and volumes were echoed more than once by committee members, who are no doubt overwhelmed by the weight of a problem for which there is no clear or speedy solution.

Unlike many meetings held in city hall, the members of the Public Works Committee took a noble step in allowing citizens to share their ideas for how to curb the spread of trash in the city – one resident proposed reverting back to the earlier method of attaching garbage service fees to water service bills; another proposed cross-referencing water service rosters with garbage service rosters in order to get an idea of which residents are not in compliance with the city ordinance requiring all citizens to participate in garbage collection services; still another recommended publishing the names of those found littering or failing to maintain garbage service as a form of public shaming.

But the boldness of allowing the public to speak during a formal business meeting shortly paid unwanted dividends as big ideas gave way to insults and allegations, neither of which is conducive to constructive conversation.

To be sure, outbursts of passion are as common to the human experience as sunlight is to the dawn and not one among us is immune to their whims.

In a peculiar way, it’s inspiring to see our citizens and city leaders collectively incensed by a problem we all endure and are motivated to find a way to bring it a successful conclusion.

However, for progress to be made on any issue that requires the unified action of the served and the servants alike, civility must prevail at all times and each party must strive diligently to ensure that it does lest the very end we hope to achieve is dismissed for some momentary victory in a frivolous argument that in no way advances our shared agenda.

If we don’t wish to see our personal relationships become as littered with refuse as the streets of our city, we must use calculated words and respectful tones in addressing one another in each interaction, particularly those that inflame us all equally.

To be sure, fury is justified on all sides in this ongoing trouble and that fury can often be quite useful in diverting an apathetic leader’s gaze from a fickle issue onto one of communal concern. But, in this struggle at least, local leadership is intimately aware of the crisis and seemingly committed to seeing it addressed.

Under such conditions, rage is of no use to the populace and stands only to alienate those in a position to appropriately address the citizens’ grievances.

Perhaps even more so, it is imperative that elected leadership employ patience and calm when responding to the outbursts on an enraged citizenry, recalling always that such anger is indicative of a population taking seriously its civic duty.

This problem, like all others that affect all people in the city, will require collaboration from the citizens and city leaders alike and, for that collaboration to yield strong fruit, all parties must be able to come to the table in a spirit of unity and civility.

Now is not the time for finger-pointing or name-calling, now is the time for civility amid frustration.