Opinion ID: 3134250
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Ill 2d at 243-44; Kalodimos, 103 Ill. 2d at 493.

Text: Efficient has been defined as follows: 1 : serving as or characteristic of an efficient cause : causally productive : OPERANT  2 : marked by ability to choose and use the most effective and least wasteful means of doing a task or accomplishing a purpose . Webster's Third New International Dictionary 725 (1981). This definition does not inherently compel the conclusion that an efficient system of public schools necessarily involves statewide parity of educational opportunity and resources. However, we do not believe that the precise meaning of the word efficient as used in section 1 of the education article is entirely clear and free from doubt, or that efficient could not conceivably be interpreted in the manner that plaintiffs claim. We note that the Court of Appeals of Maryland determined that Maryland's constitutional requirement that the General Assembly establish a thorough and efficient system of free public schools was on its face  plainly susceptible of more than one meaning. Hornbeck v. Somerset County Board of Education, 295 Md. 597, 619, 458 A.2d 758, 770 (1983). In determining whether the thorough and efficient provision required exact equality in per pupil funding and expenditures among Maryland's school districts, the Hornbeck court deemed it essential to consider the history underlying the enactment of the provision. Hornbeck, 295 Md. at 619-20, 458 A.2d at 770. Courts in other jurisdictions with similar constitutional efficiency provisions have also looked to sources beyond the language of the constitution to determine the meaning of those provisions. See Rose v. Council for Better Education, Inc., 790 S.W.2d 186, 205-06 (Ky. 1989); Edgewood Independent School District v. Kirby, 777 S.W.2d 391, 394-96 (Tex. 1989); Pauley v. Kelly, 162 W. Va. 672, 681-89, 255 S.E.2d 859, 866-69 (1979); see also Rose, 790 S.W.2d at 221 (Vance, J., dissenting) (It is because of [the] universal concern expressed by the delegates to the convention that I conclude that the word `efficient' as used by them must include not only its dictionary definition but must also be construed to include the requirement of substantial equality of educational opportunity). We shall likewise consider the history underlying the adoption of section 1 of the education article. The education article of the 1970 Constitution originated as a proposal submitted by the education committee of the Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention. 6 Record of Proceedings, Sixth Illinois Constitutional Convention 227 (hereinafter cited as Proceedings). At the outset, we note that an introductory passage in the education committee's report on the proposed education article states, [t]he opportunity for an education, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms. 6 Proceedings 231. Considered in isolation, this statement might lend some credence to plaintiffs' position. However, this general statement of principle was not made in reference to the efficiency requirement or any other specific language in the proposed education article. Instead, as authority for this proposition the education committee report cites the landmark decision in Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 98 L. Ed. 873, 74 S. Ct. 686 (1954), which was, of course, based on the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment of the United States Constitution. As explained below, specific references in the convention record to the efficiency requirement place the concept in a significantly different light. The constitutional requirement that the State provide for an efficient system of high quality educational institutions and services corresponds to section 1 of article VIII of the 1870 Constitution, which stated, The general assembly shall provide a thorough and efficient system of free schools, whereby all children of this state may receive a good common school education. Ill. Const. 1870, art. VIII, §1. Under the 1870 Constitution, this court consistently held that the question of the efficiency and thoroughness of the school system was one solely for the legislature to answer, and that the courts lacked the power to intrude. People v. Deatherage, 401 Ill. 25, 31 (1948) (and cases cited); People ex rel. Taylor v. Camargo Community Consolidated School District No. 158, 313 Ill. 321, 327-28 (1924) (Whether [a provision governing detachment of territory from school districts] tends to affect adversely or favorably the thoroughness and efficiency of the system of free schools is a legislative question which is not for our determination); see also G. Braden & R. Cohn, The Illinois Constitution: An Annotated and Comparative Analysis 400-01 (1969) (It has been said that the `thorough and efficient' requirement was solely a matter for legislative discretion and the courts will not look into it). However, under a limited exception to this principle it was held that pursuant to the thorough and efficient requirement school district boundaries must be established so that the districts are compact and contiguous. See People ex rel. Community Unit School District No. 5 v. Decatur School District No. 61, 31