JOHN M. ALLISON Mr. John M. Allison passed away while serving in the capacity of. Town Manager at the McNary Project on August 18, 1948. The excerpt on the opposite page [viewed below] was taken from a talk given in Portland, Oregon, on April 10, l946 to the Engineering Forum and expresses the psychology of the man who deserves a great deal of credit for his outstanding work in assembling the material which is presently used in the Town Management Manual adopted by the North Pacific Division as a guide for such operations. John Allison was a considerate and kindly person who exerted his every effort to insure the happiness of others at all times
THE NEED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PLANNING FOR PROJECT TOWNS
– By – John M. Allison
We are, all of us, interested in the vast long-range program of our own department, as well as in those in process of development by ether federal agencies, particularly those that are of concern to the Columbia River Basin.
In reply to questions concerning justification of our proposed program most of us would mention such benefits as flood control, aid to navigation power development, irrigation and others less tangible but none the less real. In so doing, we would be mentioning individual parts of a more general picture that might be likened to a jig saw puzzle, If we fit the parts together we will see that fundamentally and finally our program is for the benefit of PEOPLE. There is absolutely no other justification for our plans. We pride ourselves that as technically-trained men, our actions are logical, our thought processes consistent. Let us then be truly consistent, and realize that our first obligation is to people, as individuals, as groups, and as a whole.
We cannot alone carry our plans to final completion. We must draw upon the national reservoir of people to help us. Certainly that segment of the people which will be drawn to help with our program, is entitled to receive the full benefits of foresighted planning. Their employment upon our various projects will not remove the fact that they are people, and as such are entitled to the department’s best efforts. We must prepare many accommodations for project workers. Large projects designed for multiple benefits are usually situated in isolated areas. In such instances, we must provide towns complete in practically every detail. Such towns should be as nearly perfect as our skill can make them.
There have been developed in this district some preliminary plans for project towns. Cursory examinations of such plans by some of our personnel have resulted in charges of utopianism. To such statements I take exception. To the philosophy behind them, I am unalterably opposed.
The ancient and contemptible concept of a “construction camp good enough to get by” is outmoded and now is entertained only by those who for inexplicable and indefensible reasons feel they are a bit better than the folk who will help us. Often the worst managed company mine provides quarters good enough to do. Because of man’s indifference to man, they get by. We must plan towns in the name of our great nation, for the United States of America, and we must do the very best that we can within the limitations imposed by the yard-sticks of economics and human values – – placing all possible emphasis upon the latter. Anyway, if we can afford it, if we can come reasonably near to amortizing its cost, what is wrong with Utopia? (” . . . hence, any place or state of ideal perfection, especially in laws, government and social conditions”).
Certainly whenever it gets the opportunity, the federal government should set the pace in improving housing and general social conditions.
