Final answer:
Meeting minutes should not be annotated with subjective narrative comments as they are intended to record decisions and actions objectively. False.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that meeting minutes should be "annotated" with an association executive's narrative comments to supplement each objective covered at the meeting is typically False. Meeting minutes are meant to be a factual and objective record of what was discussed and decided in a meeting. However, adding narrative comments could introduce subjectivity and bias, which is not the purpose of meeting minutes. The role of minutes is to provide a clear, concise, and accurate record of decisions and actions, whereas narrative comments from an executive could be in the form of a separate report or communication to convey their perspective or analysis of the meeting.
Annotations in the context of meeting minutes can be used for clarifications or to add information about the source of a decision, like a reference to a document or a previous discussion. Yet, these should still maintain the objectivity of the record. Engagement in meetings, such as the expectations regarding camera usage in online meetings or the importance of public comment in local governmental meetings, are separate issues that do not impact the fundamental nature of meeting minutes.