Several departmental AI tools show near-zero use but remain connected to city data. What sustainment action fits?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Ghost apps still chew risk. Schedule sunset reviews, retire the unused civic AI tools, and shrink the sprawl before something forgotten bites you.
Full Explanation
When departmental AI tools show near-zero use but remain connected to city data, the fitting sustainment action is to run sunset reviews that retire unused civic AI tools and reduce risk sprawl. Unused integrations still expand attack surface, privacy exposure, license cost, and confusion about which tools are approved. A deliberate sunset path—stakeholder notice, access revocation, data disposition, and archive of lessons—keeps the portfolio honest. Leaving unused tools live forever to avoid change-management effort fails because avoided effort today becomes unmanaged risk tomorrow. Advertising unused tools more aggressively without reviewing necessity fails by assuming low use is only awareness, not fitness or demand, and can revive a weak tool without governance. Merging all unused tools into one mega-assistant without risk review fails because consolidation without assessment can combine weak controls and unclear ownership into a larger problem. Exam caveat: "drive adoption harder" distractors ignore that some tools should die. Operational check: quarterly list low-use AI connections, score necessity and risk, retire or remediate with a written sunset checklist, and update the approved-tools catalog for staff.