Discovery finds two departmental SharePoint farms with overlapping content and declining usage after a municipal reorganization. Stakeholders propose migrating both unchanged. Which 7Rs-oriented recommendation is best?

Discovery that finds two departmental SharePoint farms with overlapping content and declining usage after a municipal reorganization should drive a 7Rs-oriented consolidation decision. Prefer retire, or consolidate-then-retire, for the duplicate farm rather than paying to migrate redundant systems twice. That saves migration and ongoing run cost while simplifying staff collaboration onto one platform aligned to the new organization chart. Rehosting both farms twice to AWS to preserve every URL forever without consolidation fails by doubling cloud spend and operational toil for declining overlap that reorganization already made obsolete. Refactoring both farms into mainframe batch jobs before any cloud decision fails as an irrelevant platform leap that does not address duplicate content or user experience. Retaining both farms on-premises indefinitely without a retirement roadmap fails continuous improvement and leaves reorganization debt unpaid on the municipal balance sheet. Exam caveat: when discovery shows duplicate declining systems, retire or consolidate-then-retire beats migrating redundancy. Operational check: inventory overlapping site collections with owners, pick a system of record, migrate unique content only, redirect URLs, decommission the duplicate farm under change control, cancel any wave tickets that would have rehosted both, and confirm storage and licensing line items drop in the next billing cycle.