The N&O article I just linked you to deals with how Carrboro is having a major issue with forced annexation in their town that will be a factor in their election on Tuesday. Since only those inside the town limits here will be voting, it doesn't really matter too much of my stance on the issue to voters. However, my stance will be known to all, anyway.
I have a problem with forced annexation simply so that a town can start taxing newly inducted residents. It is one thing is those property owners live in an area served by public utilities owned by that town and are or will be immediately receiving town services. Rarely has that been the case, however. I have read articles about how some properties have been surrounded by the incorporated limits of a town and yet not annexed. They receive all city services, yet are not officially part of the municipality. That is a prime instance of where annexation is entirely appropriate.
Outlying areas are differernt. Many people enjoy subdivision life outside of corporate limits for the lower taxes, location, and proximity to a town for convenience. To start taxing people just because a town can is entirely inappropriate and unethical. I will fight such things on Selma's Town Council.
Voluntary annexation is an entirely different situation. Sysco is a great example. They wanted city services such as water, sewer, and electrical. Thus, the property was voluntarily annexed into the town.