I agree. There's no reason why a LFL would affect the public library negatively.
Nobody will cut funding for public libraries, because "we have a LFL now".
Nobody will cut funding for public libraries, because "we have a LFL now".
From the article. I’m with you, I don’t think it’s likely, but the article did so their research and show that there’s precedent for exactly what you’re describing.
Edit: By “we can debate motives endlessly” I mean that your argument appears to be “the real motive for closing libraries is that no one is using them.” Which may have some basis but at this point is not substantiated, whereas the article did provide at least some evidence.
Those people may cite LFLs as a substitute, but I doubt even that.
If someone wanted to argue that public libraries are irrelevant, the Internet is a better argument than LFLs are.