I've name-changed for this because it would utterly out me.
My city was planning to close a number of libraries, but offered some to community groups to run, rather than close them altogether. I am heavily involved in volunteering at one of the libraries, which has been kept open by a local charity.
Don't get me wrong: I absolutely think councils should run libraries, not volunteers. But the thought of losing such a valuable public service in a vulnerable area made some of us step forward to keep it open. Maybe it was a triumph of pragmatism over principle, but the net result is that the library is still open for people to use.
In general it has worked well. We provide access and help with Universal Credit, internet access, homework help, special sessions for children and carers and lots of other things - including access to books, of course. The charity uses the building when it is not open as a library to provide other services to the community.
We'll never run it as well as trained librarians, but we can still help people find information, introduce children to new authors, be company in a warm place for pensioners, and help in lots of other ways. Some of the people who benefit most are the volunteers who learn or refresh skills, and get to mix with other people. I am now heavily regretting not training as a librarian in the first place. I would start training now - except that there are of course no jobs...
I don't think this is the best option - but it is not a bad option, if libraries really are going to close in your area and people will be left with nothing.
Someone said that libraries are the last public spaces which are not after your money. It would be a terrible shame to lose them.