Marianne Dyson
NSS Director

Ms. Dyson

Although not surprised, I am somewhat saddened that this has came to past,
but not sad enough to make a donation or to try to save the NSS as is.

It is my opinion that the NSS has been beating a dead horse since it's
founding and has been wasting the money that it has spent on lobbying congress.
That
money could have better been spent helping some of the x prize contenders or
companies like 1000Planets, Inc.

Unfortunately all of the major space advocacy groups like the NSS, The Final
Frontier Society, The Mars Society and to some extent the Planetary
Society all waste great deals of the available monies from private individuals
who want to see us in space on this endeavor.
This is one reason why all have suffered a decrease in membership and
donations.
It is my feeling that if a concerted effort, to actually help us get into
space, by these organizations (or at least one of these) organizations were
forthcoming, their membership and donations would rebound.

I would like to be able to rejoin the NSS but cannot while this money is
being wasted this way.
The only way that I could rejoin would be for the NSS to restrict its
lobbying efforts to getting the government out of the space business except for
national defense and to help as many of the private space efforts as is
possible.

John Wayne Smith, CEO 1000Planets, Inc.

For a while I was a member of the National Space Society but since I have
always considered that Space Research is not a proper Government function. I
will
not miss it.
I would rather see the money that they spend lobbying congress spent on
helping private groups develop their ability to get into space.

For those NASA bashers this could be the time to change the basis of debate.

John Wayne Smith

Subject: Future of National Space Society

Dear fellow NSS members:

The NSS board recently received a message from our Chairman Kirby Kin urging
us all to attend a meeting in DC on December 6 to determine the future of NSB.


NSS is at a crossroads. We have been operating at a deficit for about two
years now. Thanks to a generous endowment and cost-cutting measures, we were
able
to weather the bad economy. But a careful review of our fundraising methods
and prospects for next year indicate that our expenses will continue to outpace
our income and the Society will cease to be viable unless we make some
drastic changes.

Everything is on the table.

A special committee has been formed to prepare some options and detail their
financial consequences. I am not on this committee, and eagerly await their
report.

However, whatever options we are given, the decision the officers and board
need to make should be based on what YOU, the members of NSS want this
organization to DO to reach our goal of space settlement.

---Focus on Influencing Space Policy---

Last year, I was on a committee to review rental options for our HQ. The
decision was that we should stay in DC because space policy and funding for NASA
is decided by people in DC and these are fundamental to reaching our goal. We
felt it was important to have a DC address to make use of our new Executive
Director's considerable political connections. Rather than incur the expense of
moving, we decided to stay where we are on Pennsylvania Ave. -- a very
prestigious address -- in a smaller office. The rent there is considerable, but
it is
easy for our ED to get to the Hill for meetings and "power lunches." I do not
have data on how often the ED actually attends capital events, but we did a
seminar on suborbital issues in the summer, and our ED did testify to Congress.
(Presidents of other organizations with HQ elsewhere, flew in and testified.
How much influence each had is hard to measure.)

Our office does not have a place to hold seminars or meetings with
congressional staff. There is a tiny conference room that isn't even big enough
for the
board to meet. We have a staff of 2, and room for our reference library and
files.

When L5 was first formed, the HQ was in Tucson. The Mars Society and the
Planetary Society do not have offices in DC.
Houston and Huntsville and Orlando have been suggested as alternative
locations for HQ because these offer access to NASA facilities, personnel,
conference/visitor centers, and the major contractor operations (and
space-friendly
media). Rents are considerably cheaper at all these locations compared to DC,
and
the savings could be used to fly our ED to DC for Congressional visits.

A suggestion has been made to pay a part-time person in DC to be our
"Washington face," and let them operate out of their home office or in
combination
with some other group's office, and have our HQ elsewhere or handled by a
management company. If we move out of DC, our chances of retaining an ED with
political insider connections are greatly diminished.

The political climate for getting some major initiative in space is very good
right now, and will continue to be good at least through next spring. The NSS
Policy Committee has already delivered a position paper to the White House,
and this paper was distributed to the membership.

Some feel that our major political influence is not via our DC HQ or our ED,
but via our members writing letters and visiting Congressional representatives
in their districts and in DC in our April events. I don't know how to weigh
these things separately. Our policy committee and the, positions it promotes
via mailings and press releases have an effect, but it is usually the ED who is
quoted and interviewed by the media. In the past, our Presidents and Policy
Committee Chairmen have also been quoted and interviewed.

Considering the above,

1. On a scale of 1 to 5, how important is it to you that NSS have Influence
on US space policy?

2. On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 not important, 3 neutral, and 5 very
important, how do you rate having a DC office?

3. On a scale of 1 to 5, how do you rate having the Executive Director
available/living in DC?

----Focus on Public Outreach----

Our primary means of communicating with the public (and ourselves) about
space is through our magazine and website. The magazine is considered the major
membership benefit, and is quite expensive to produce and mail.
Editors have not been successful in attracting advertising, and are not
tasked to do so. The magazine expenses continue to rise. We cut it from monthly
to
bi-monthly, and last year to quarterly. The number of pages is down to a
minimum. Most issues have about 7 features on various subjects, mostly by
relatively unknown writers, but a sprinkling by well-known writers. Some
conference and
chapter news is included and a summary of space news. Cover art has been of
high quality, and the interior is all-color. We took over the space.com
magazine list a while back.

Our editor, Frank Sietzen has resigned. The last issue was his last. A guest
editor is doing the next issue.

Many people get their space news online or via other more frequent
publications such as Space News or Aviation Week. Some have suggested that we do
like
space.com did, and arrange for members who want a magazine to get some other
space publication for the rest of their subscription and then discontinue the
magazine as a membership benefit. The savings would probably not be enough on
their own to keep NSS operating in the black, and the fear is that we'd lose a
significant number of members. Are these members we really need to accomplish
our goals? Some have suggested we offer a non-subscription membership, or a
subscription-only membership.

The Planetary Society has a magazine, the Mars Society does not. Their dues
are more than ours, and the ExCom has already decided that a dues increase will
be necessary. Because of the magazine, we lose money on people recruited at
the student/senior rate for the first year. (The cost of recruiting them plus
delivering the benefit outweighs what they pay.)
Getting a magazine reminds members of NSS. Most members only hear from NSS
via the magazine and membership mailings asking for money to support various
policy positions. Without a magazine, it is feared that renewal rates will drop.
Currently, we have very good retention of members.

Many have complained that the website still lacks content other than press
releases and old data. It is not a significant recruitment tool for new members,
the merchandising area is not updated with new items, and it is very
expensive to maintain. We are looking at adding new merchandising options, but
these
are not expected to generate significant income. The only way to really cut
expenses in this area is to go with volunteers. We did this before, but had a
disgruntled volunteer really do a number on us.
However, if the task is shared by a committee of volunteers, it is felt that
this problem can be overcome. General feeling is that the website is an
underutilized tool.

The NSS Online Report is going out monthly and very popular. The expense is
minimal. Some feel that this reminds members of NSS more than the magazine, and
that we could move to an electronic publication combining the graphics and
quality writing of Ad Astra. (Ad Astra has not been using contracts to obtain
electronic rights, so that is why its content is not on the website.)


4. On a scale of 1 to 5, how important is it for NSS to publish a full-color
magazine to accomplish our goals?

5. On a scale of 1 to 5, how important is it for NSS to have a website
without advertising?

---The NSS identity---

Some have suggested that NSS merge with various other space groups and/or
form some sort of alliance. We could combine staff, databases, member services,
websites, etc., and boards. Our volunteers would be absorbed into each other's
committees and projects. In a way, this has already happened with NSS spinning
off other groups that focus on the Moon, Mars, CATS, politics, etc. So the
idea is to gather all these children together again, but create a new identity
for us all. We could join forces with the Space Foundation to do educational
activities or with the Mars Society to do projects or give up our nonprofit
status and become a space lobbying organization such as Spacecause.

When L5 and NSI merged, the two groups each lost members (this is my
perception - someone please correct me if this is not correct!), but gradually,
the
new group got comfortable and started growing. Then it stagnated, and started
spinning off factions. This is part of the problem with NSS now - folks with
special interests join one or more of the spin-offs and dilute their donations
and volunteer time. We are mostly left with our political influence role and the
magazine to distinguish us.
Attendance at our ISDCs is way down while other organizations' conferences
are growing. We seem to need a niche.

NSS has little if any name recognition with the "outside" world, though it
does have some within the space community. However, our most prestigious members
are no longer actively involved. We only have one astronaut on our board, and
he is not running for reelection because of family and work obligations. Our
board of governors met last year, and remain supportive, but are not out
championing our cause. Our directors are all hard-working and talented, but not
famous like they were in the past when Buzz was chairman and Majel was on the
board. That could change in the next election cycle, but I'm looking at the
current leadership.

Our ED's salary and benefits is our single biggest expense. His contract Is
up for renewal at the end of the year.

6. On a scale of 1 to 5, how important is it have an ED and staff (versus
volunteers whose expenses are paid) to represent NSS and do its work?

7. On a scale of 1 to 5, how important is it have NSS (versus some other
merged organization) in order to accomplish our goals?

And probably the most important question because it indicates what you think
an organization the size of NSS should/could do:

8. If NSS were to be disbanded/absorbed, what would you have the board do
with the assets? I don't know how much that would be, but assume for this
purpose
that it is a million dollars. Our bylaws require it to be put to a charitable
use.

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of these questions. If you are
more comfortable answering me privately, I will keep your name confidential, and
pass along your comments in summary form. Please ask your chapter members for
input. The officers (not the board - the rules don't allow time for us to
call a special board meeting, but the board members' opinions will be recorded
and considered) will be deciding what to do with NSS on December

9. We need to hear from you now.

Marianne Dyson
NSS Director

[url=www.MarianneDyson.com]http://www.MarianneDyson.com[/url]