I think that accurate recording of outcomes is vital - it has been said that the person taking the minutes of a meeting controls the outcome of the meeting.
If you have ever seen a non-technical manager try to summarise a technical point you may well have seen how much nuance and emphasis can be missed in a sentance or two.
I would say that the writer of a report needs to have at least some domain expertise. In this case the Domain appears to be IT so some IT expertise is needed.
[edited to add ...]
I have seen two approaches work:
1). Each review has a lead reviewer, they have resposibility for producing the formal write-up. They may delegate to scribe in the actual meeting. These roles rotate through the review team. No need for a separate job role.
2). Sometimes there are people with an IT background who actually don't really want to do the development - they actually want to focus on these procedural aspects of development. Such folk may be rare, but they do exist.