I have a personal website that I almost never update. I thought updates would be so easy if I used a CMS that I would do them all the time; it turned out that maintaining the CMS was such a hassle that I never touch the site. Looking back, I wish that I had just used a static HTML editor that had templating in it, like Microsoft Expression Web. In fact, I've been involved in a number of projects where it was the use of a complex system instead of static HTML that effectively wrecked the site.
I wonder how much of your project you leave as static HTML, and how much gets generated by a system, whether it be ASP.NET, PHP, some sort of CMS, etc. For me, I feel like moving back to static HTML for more things would actually be a good idea.
Justin James is the Lead Architect for Conigent.