Just to respond to Andrew and Tom D&#39;s points (and I largely agree with Tom M)<div><br></div><div>- Greyham&#39;s experience includes working with a number of volunteer-driven organisations, including the Association of Church Treasurers, which a pretty much entirely volunteer organisation. When I was discussing the idea of co-option with him we spoke about our volunteer culture at some length. I am sure other trustees did the same. I think it&#39;s fair to say the Board wouldn&#39;t co-opt anyone who they thought would be a poor fit with our values as an organisation. I am not sure if he&#39;s subscribed to this list - I will check!</div>
<div><br></div><div>- Tom - the Articles give the Board discretion about who to co-opt in the event of a casual vacancy, so long as the Board is unanimous. I think that, particularly given the circumstances, we did the right thing to use that discretion. As you indicate in your post, it would have been possible for us to create another process to go through, but I don&#39;t think that would have been helpful. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div><br></div><div>Chris</div>