A campaign to set up a new town council has been defeated after it was slated as a costly “talking shop controlled by a narrow group of local busybodies”.

Supporters lobbying to establish a Whitstable Town Council for years say that “residents will miss out” as a result of the snub.

But those opposed to the idea say “the last thing we need is more boomers objecting to everything”.

In December, Canterbury City Council’s (CCC) general purposes committee met and voted in favour of a Community Governance Review - a survey of residents’ views on establishing a town council for Whitstable.

It came after a long-running campaign and Subsequent petition for a town council by the CT5 People’s Forum which attracted 1,797 signatures.

Such petitions need signatures from 7.5% or more of the electorate in the affected area to sign - 1,763 in Whitstable, which has an electorate of about 23,500.

However, the new local council - with powers identical to that of a parish - would have cost residents an extra £60 to £80 per year on their council tax bill.

There is also no cap on the amount by which town and parish councils can increase their precepts each year - so residents could see the fee jump even further whether they wanted a town council or not.

Across the whole CT5 area - which covers Whitstable itself as well as Yorkletts, Radfall, Seasalter, Swalecliffe, Tankerton and Chestfield - only 1,809 residents responded to the consultation.

Of those, only 691 (38%) supported creating a town council, whereas 1,014 (56%) were opposed and 104 (6%) did not know.

Cllr Chris Cornell (Lab), cabinet member for coastal communities, said: ‘We asked Whitstable if it wanted a town council and they said no.

“We’ve listened and are recommending the council don’t spend any more taxpayers money on an expensive second stage of consultation to rerun the debate.”

In council papers, the full responses to the consultation are publicly available.

“The last thing we need is more boomers objecting to everything,” wrote one who opposed the creation of a town council.

“Please no more parish council-standard drivel,” they added.

One wrote that the institution would be “another layer of useless bureaucracy - busybodies funded by us”.

Another wrote that all a Whitstable Town Council would create is “more hot air, and the establishment of a mere talking shop controlled by a narrow group of local busybodies, political has-beens and hobbyists”.

Chris Stanley, speaking on behalf of the Campaign for a Whitstable Town Council, said: “We are pleased that Tankerton and Whitstable Harbour support this but we are disappointed that the other wards who responded to the consultation said no.

“We understand that money is tight for many and they don’t want to pay more council tax. This was the reason used by those who campaigned against.

“The sad thing is that this means residents will miss out on the benefits of having a town council where it could access money that Canterbury City or Kent County councils cannot.

‘We understand that money is tight for many and they don’t want to pay more council tax… residents will miss out on the benefits of having a town council’

“This includes support for those who need it most, better community facilities, support for local projects and much, much more.

“If they proceed with the second consultation, we will not give up and make sure that the case for and the benefits of a town council will be made widely known.”

A spokesman for the campaign against a new town council told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “We believe that Whitstable does not need a town council for many reasons but the main one being the cost.

“We are in the midst of a cost of living crisis and people are experiencing real hardship - another tax burden would add to the misery.

“We are happy with the current governance arrangements and feel that the voluntary organisations Whitstable has will continue to do a marvellous job.”

A report to be heard at CCC’s general purposes committee meeting on April 16 recommends that instead of going to the second stage of the process to establish a town council, councillors instead vote to call an eight-week feedback period.

Cllr Cornell told the LDRS: “We will now take this opportunity to consider how it can help build confidence in local people that we are a council not just interested in Canterbury city.”

A new attempt to form a Whitstable Town Council through a Community Governance Review cannot be made until at least two years after the current one ends.

In this case, the process will officially end in October - when CCC will decide how to act on the feedback it receives.