The Show for May 15, 2026: Friday NewsCap, film festival on the border wall and more

An audit finds problems with the way Arizona’s universal school voucher program is run. Our Friday NewsCap panelists analyze that and the rest of the week’s top stories. Plus, the Nogales International Film Festival is showing its feature film on the border wall, with audiences on both sides.

Transcript

MARK BRODIE: Hi, I’m Mark Brodie, co-host of The Show, an original production from KJZZ. Every weekday, we bring you the latest news and culture from across the state. You can find much more at theshow.kjzz.org. Here’s today’s episode.

MARK BRODIE: Good morning. It’s The Show here on KJZZ 91.5 in Phoenix, I’m Mark Brodie. Coming up, a film festival that takes cross-border collaboration to a new level. And a longtime Valley actor returns to the stage for the first time in a long time. But first, it is time for the Friday News Cap and some voices from the news this week.

TOM HORNE: They quoted Kim as saying, “I did not have authority to deny those because the parents knew what was best for their kids.” So if Kim were superintendent —

KIMBERLY YEE: That’s not true.

TOM HORNE: She would be granting Rolex watches.

KIMBERLY YEE: It’s not true. I would not grant Rolex watches.

REX SCOTT: Also, on the advice of counsel, I move that we refer allegations of potential perjury by the sheriff to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office and to direct the county administrator to do so on behalf of the board.

JAKE HOFFMAN: We are talking about making sure that we don’t have adverse actors coordinating in concert to obstruct the educational opportunities of Arizona kids.

MARK KELLY: Whether it’s I make a point on a show like yours or in an open hearing, they don’t want to give specific answers, because they probably at this point they realize that they’ve made a number of mistakes.

JOHN CONLEY: Have I been an infantryman on the front lines in a battle? No, I have not. But I can take care of those infantrymen because I have been doing this job for nearly 40 years.

MARK BRODIE: And joining me to talk about an Auditor General report on the state’s ESA program, a dispute over the eligibility of a newly appointed county official and more are Daniel Scarpinato of Winged Victory Agency. Daniel, good morning.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Good morning.

MARK BRODIE: And Mike Haener of Lumen Strategies. Mike, good morning to you.

MIKE HAENER: Good morning.

MARK BRODIE: So, Daniel, let me start with you on this uh ESA report. Um, the Attorney General’s Office of the Auditor General’s Office basically found some instances of fraud and purchases that shouldn’t have been allowed. But it seems like the bigger issue was that like there’s almost the environment that would allow more of this. So, it’s almost like the Auditor General said, "We don’t know that there’s like widespread problems here, but we also don’t know that there’s not."

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Mhm. Yeah. So, my takeaway here is fraud is bad. Okay, and this is why conservatives are generally skeptical of large government programs, which this is one of those at this point. And so, there is major disruption happening in the education sector. You know, the largest kindergarten class ever in Arizona was 2012, it’s been on the decline since. Last year, only 62% of parents chose a traditional district school to put their kid into. AI is fundamentally changing our economy and what education is going to look like. So, regardless of what happens with this program long term, there is going to be an upheaval within the education system over the next decade that’s going to fundamentally change this, and and choice is going to be important. So, we have to get this right. This program is going to exist in some form, no matter what happens at the ballot this year, because actually it’s interesting, Democrats are no longer talking about getting rid of the program. And so, it is

MARK BRODIE: Where there are two competing ballot measures dealing with the with this program.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: But both of those would leave it in place, and there would still be families on it. And so, this is a technology issue. Uh, other states have followed us like Texas, Utah, Iowa, and they’ve gotten this right. Uh, there’s a RFI, RFP process out there to open this up. And as I’ve been able to walk through the current program with parents, it um, it just seems like it’s very clunky. I think some of this is people accidentally purchasing things through their Amazon account which is linked. There’s a lot here that could and should be fixed. And so, the treasurer is not wrong that there are things that need to be fixed about it. The policy is there to do it, it’s it’s an implementation issue.

MARK BRODIE: Well, so Republicans, Daniel, have been really re- resistant to putting any kind of changes in place in terms of what critics would call guardrails, trying to, you know, maybe funding more uh auditors at the Department of Education, making sure that, you know, some of these purchases aren’t un- unauthorized. Might this report be the thing that changes that?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, I would actually challenge that. Republicans did propose more money for uh people at the department, the Democrats opposed that. Um, and I also think, yes, I think the answer is people do want to get this right. I think that there needs to be focus on how do we, you know, you could hire a hundred people, I mean with AI and technology, you can prevent a lot of this without humans reviewing every transaction. I actually think part of the problem right now is that that is how they’re doing it, is that people are purchasing things and then we’re going in and looking at all of them. I think so much of this could be done at the front end with technology.

MARK BRODIE: Do you see changes to the program, Mike, after this report?

MIKE HAENER: God, no. The uh, I I was going to agree with Daniel, but but Republicans have their head in the sand on this. They talk about waste, fraud, and abuse constantly in every government program except this one. This is a cash cow and it’s allowing people to do whatever they want, and there is no interest by this legislature to make any changes to that program.

MARK BRODIE: Do you think it will have an impact on the superintendent’s race? I mean, it was sort of one of the issues that got Kimberly Yee, the state treasurer, into the primary against public school superintendent Tom Horne in the first place. Is there any reason to think that that this will not continue to be an issue in that primary?

MIKE HAENER: Oh, I think it will be an issue in the primary and and again, there are folks in that that will vote in that primary that again, think this is this program shouldn’t have any guardrails around it. And and if you if you look at education in Arizona, where I agree with Daniel is, like we have a reckoning coming in the fact that we have declining birth rates and declining enrollments, and we’re going to have to realign the K-12 system. The challenge is, right now we have three different educational systems. We have the traditional K-12 system, we have the charter system, and now we have this ESA system. They all get different amounts of money and they all have different sets of rules. And if you look at any bill that is that is offered at the legislature, they generally say we’re going to put more rules and regulations around the traditional K-12 world, not so much the charters, and nothing for the ESA program. That seems to be a bad way to run a railroad.

MARK BRODIE: Daniel, do you think that that this report could swing the Republican primary for state school superintendent?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: No, I don’t think this report is going to do that. I I I would prefer if you agreed with me next time, Mike. You should have gone with your instincts. I, look, this is fundamentally an important program um, and parents should get to choose what to do with their children, their education, and and their dollars. And so, uh, the good news is this has issue has changed a lot. Um, it’s still partisan in nature, but Democrats have actually seeded a lot of ground and accepted that parents want school choice, um and the question is, how do we get it right and how do we preserve it?

MARK BRODIE: Is there time given where we are in the legislative session? I’ll ask both of you because you’ve both spent time with the legislature. Is there time to do anything about this program? And maybe is there the will in an election year to do anything about this program in 2026, Mike?

MIKE HAENER: No, the as I said, this Republican legislature and the more the the folks negotiating the budget, because that’s probably the last place that we could make changes to the ESA program, are not going to be okay with making any changes to that program. They’re going to say no.

MARK BRODIE: Well, I mean, House Speaker Steve Montenegro has said that, you know, th- these issues that the report brought up need to be addressed. Do you do you think he’s not looking to actually do that? Or maybe he is and the caucus isn’t?

MIKE HAENER: Not in this session.

MARK BRODIE: Not in the session. Daniel, do you think there’s time this year?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, I don’t believe that there necessarily need to be policy changes. I do think there need to be implementation changes. Shockingly, government isn’t good at everything. And I think there’s room for improvement.

MARK BRODIE: Mike just made a shocked face when you said that government isn’t good at everything, by the way. Um, let me ask you guys about a a story out of Pima County where uh the sheriff, Chris Nanos, has been in some hot water with the board of supervisors. He there was some talk that the board might try to remove him from office. Uh, instead, they decided not to do that, but instead refer uh his case and allegations of potential perjury uh to the uh to the Attorney General’s Office. I guess, Mike, in a sense, it’s good for Sheriff Nanos that he wasn’t removed from office, but maybe not great that he’s going to have the AG’s office looking into him?

MIKE HAENER: Yeah, you never want to have that, but but obviously Sheriff Nanos, uh or the board of supervisors, I don’t think is able to remove him uh for whatever uh indiscretions that that they’ve alleged. And so, referring him to the Attorney General’s Office is probably the only thing that they really could do.

MARK BRODIE: Daniel, we’ll call on your uh Tucson roots here. I mean, he’s been Nanos has been under fire for a little while now with various constituents in in that community. How big of a potential problem is this for him politically, do you think?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, it seems like a problem. I mean, it’s a very one-party rule county, Democrat, and the Democrats were highly critical of him, even though they didn’t remove him. Um, they, you know, their comments were pretty harsh. And so, that tells me that there is some there there. And frankly, this is really a result of a national international spotlight shining on someone who was really not prepared for that moment around the uh issue of Nancy Guthrie, Savannah Guthrie’s mother. And uh, and he’s kind of had several stumbles. And so, people are now starting to look around and vet more than they do in a Pima County Sheriff’s race.

MARK BRODIE: Might this be, I don’t want to say the end, but like could this be a real problem for his political future, to the extent that he might want to have one?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, yes, I don’t think he’s got much of a future. I think either something’s going to happen here, there could be a recall, there’s all kinds of things floating around. I also think it’s possible this might spark a discussion around should there be requirements to be a sheriff?

MARK BRODIE: Like in terms of like job requirements?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: There are none.

MARK BRODIE: Like you have to have you have to have X, Y, and Z experience or something like that.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: There are no requirements.

MARK BRODIE: Interesting. Do you do you think that’s a a discussion worth having?

MIKE HAENER: 100%. Uh, going back to the superintendent’s race as well, uh my feeling is that those positions, superintendent, sheriff, should actually be appointed by the board of supervisors with qualifications because, again, you’re you’re as the board of supervisors, you’re in charge of the county, and you want a law enforcement official at the head of that sheriff’s department that you trust and have faith in and that you could hire and fire. It seems to me to make sense that those types of positions would be appointed.

MARK BRODIE: Interesting. And there’s obviously been discussion about other county and even statewide offices of like, why do we elect them, why do we not appoint them, that kind of thing. It’s an interesting perspective.

MIKE HAENER: And again, going back to the superintendent’s race, so the the governor is elected by the people, and then the superintendent’s elected by the people. Now they’re different parties. So, are there education uh uh goals in alignment? You you would really think you’d want state government to be aligned in what they want to pursue from an education standpoint.

MARK BRODIE: Well, like a cabinet kind of situation then, than every separate office, interesting. All right, guys, we got to take a quick break. That is Mike Haener, I’m also joined by Daniel Scarpinato. I’m Mark Brodie. The Friday News Cap continues in just a moment.

Good morning, it’s the Friday News Cap on KJZZ 91.5, I’m Mark Brodie. My guests this week are Mike Haener of Lumen Strategies and Daniel Scarpinato of Winged Victory Agency. Mike, let me start with you on uh Attorney General Kris Mayes has uh taken steps to remove David Marshall uh from the office of Navajo County Recorder. This is uh somebody he was a he started the year as a state legislator, uh was in running in the primary uh as a Republican to be on the Corporation Commission, resigned from the legislature, was appointed as Navajo County Recorder, but a number of people are saying he’s not constitutionally allowed to hold that office.

MIKE HAENER: Yeah, you never want to have that, but obviously the board of supervisors I don’t think is able to remove him uh for whatever uh indiscretions that that they’ve alleged. And so referring him to the Attorney General’s Office is probably the only thing that they really could do.

MARK BRODIE: Daniel, we’ll call on your uh Tucson roots here. I mean, Nanos has been under fire for a little while now with various constituents in that community. How big of a potential problem is this for him politically, do you think?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, it seems like a problem. I mean, it’s a very one-party-rule county: Democrat. And the Democrats were highly critical of him, even though they didn’t remove him. Their comments were pretty harsh. And so that tells me that there is some there there.

And frankly, this is really a result of a national, international spotlight shining on someone who was really not prepared for that moment around the issue of Nancy Guthrie, Savannah Guthrie’s mother. And he’s kind of had several stumbles. And so, people are now starting to look around and vet more than they do in a Pima County Sheriff’s race.

MARK BRODIE: Might this be — I don’t want to say the end — but could this be a real problem for his political future, to the extent that he might want to have one?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, yes, I don’t think he’s got much of a future. I think either something’s going to happen here. There could be a recall, there’s all kinds of things floating around.

I also think it’s possible this might spark a discussion around should there be requirements to be a sheriff?

MARK BRODIE: Like in terms of job requirements?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: There are none.

MARK BRODIE: Like you have to have you have to have X, Y, and Z experience or something like that.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: There are no requirements.

MARK BRODIE: Interesting. Do you think that’s a a discussion worth having?

MIKE HAENER: One hundred percent. Going back to the superintendent’s race as well, my feeling is that those positions — superintendent, sheriff — should actually be appointed by the board of supervisors with qualifications because again, as the board of supervisors, you’re in charge of the county, and you want a law enforcement official at the head of that sheriff’s department that you trust and have faith in and that you could hire and fire. It seems to me to make sense that those types of positions would be appointed.

MARK BRODIE: Interesting. And there’s obviously been discussion about other county and even statewide offices of like, why do we elect them, why do we not appoint them, that kind of thing. It’s an interesting perspective.

MIKE HAENER: And again, going back to the superintendent’s race, so the the governor is elected by the people, and then the superintendent’s elected by the people. Now they’re different parties. So are their education goals in alignment? You would really think you’d want state government to be aligned in what they want to pursue from an education standpoint.

MARK BRODIE: More like a cabinet kind of situation then, than every separate office, interesting.

Mike, let me start with you on Attorney General Kris Mayes has taken steps to remove David Marshall from the office of Navajo County Recorder. He started the year as a state legislator, uh was in running in the primary uh as a Republican to be on the Corporation Commission, resigned from the legislature, was appointed as Navajo County Recorder, but a number of people are saying he’s not constitutionally allowed to hold that office.

MIKE HAENER: Yeah, I would agree with that. The constitution says that a legislator is not allowed to hold another state office, including a county office, in the term to which they were elected. The term, even though he resigned, the term runs through January of 2027. So, I would agree that he’s not eligible to take that office.

MARK BRODIE: Daniel, I mean, with the stipulation that none of the three of us in this room are lawyers, clearly there was some speculation that if he took this appointment, that there would be a challenge. Do you think that there’s a chance he could be removed from office?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, in the scheme of constitutional crises, this one feels low. But I do think even the Attorney General acknowledged that there isn’t really any precedent here. And uh, so, you know the courts will make a determination, and we’ll have some clarity. But I think his argument is that the law is not clear-cut, and so the courts will make a determination and then, if it is vacated, there’ll be a process to fill his replacement.

MARK BRODIE: I mean, I guess if nothing else, we will get some precedent on this, right? And maybe the courts will issue some guidance on does the the term to which a person is elected, does that include the time of the actual term or just while they’re actually serving the office?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Correct, and that’s what we don’t know. But, um you know, one of the interesting things to me is you’ve you’ve seen this year a ton of special elections around the country for legislative seats.

We don’t do that. So there’s no chance of this seat swinging or anything really changing with the legislature, other than a different legislator in this seat.

MARK BRODIE: And it has to be from the same party.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Right. So, there isn’t really, to me, any real huge consequence to this.

MIKE HAENER: Other than to David Marshall, who wouldn’t be the county recorder anymore or a legislator, or potentially a corporation commissioner.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: I guess the question is, which job’s better? And, you know, I don’t exactly understand the desire to stay down at the state Capitol, but you know, hey, whatever floats his boat.

MARK BRODIE: Well, clearly he didn’t want to. He wanted to be a Navajo County Recorder.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Sounds more fun to me.

MIKE HAENER: From a from a pay and a driving perspective, I think that being the county recorder is much, much better job.

MARK BRODIE: Certainly put fewer miles on the on the vehicle, that’s for sure.

Mike, our U.S. Senator Mark Kelly, he and (Secretary of War) Pete Hegseth just can’t seem to stop bickering with each other. Hegseth says the Department of Defense is going to look into Sen. Kelly after Kelly made some comments on one of the Sunday morning shows about the U.S. munitions stockpiles based on the war with Iran.

Kelly says, “Mr. Secretary, you said this in a public hearing. What’s the deal here?” It seems as though, sort of getting around all the bickering, all this stuff has seemed to be really good for Mark Kelly.

MIKE HAENER: Very good for Mark Kelly. And again, the appetite for going after your political opponents in this administration seems uh endless. But as Kelly pointed out, Hegseth actually said this in a public hearing, and I don’t think Kelly put it in a confidential Signal chat with a reporter.

So this is just, again, “I don’t like you and I have the ability to make your life miserable,” and that’s what this is.

MARK BRODIE: At a certain point, Daniel, like does Hegseth recognize that he’s elevating somebody that maybe otherwise wouldn’t be elevated quite so much?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: I don’t know, but I agree with a lot of what Mike said. And it’s fascinating to me because eight months into office last year, (U.S. Sen.) Ruben Gallego went to Iowa to fan the flames of a presidential run. And now you kind of look at these two senators with all that’s transpired over the last few weeks and you say, OK, Mark Kelly, if he wants to run, looking pretty good, getting a lot of good national press. Ruben Gallego, not so much. But that might be for another show.

MARK BRODIE: Well, and Kelly has always been known as somebody who raises a lot of money. We’ve seen those numbers just go up — pardon the pun — astronomically since the whole “you don’t have to obey illegal orders” controversy going on.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Yeah, through him and his wife’s network, they’ve been fundraising powerhouses. And so, I think he’s ambitious. I think he does want to do something beyond this. And so, we shall see.

MIKE HAENER: And and remember, every human that is elected to the United States Senate thinks and wants to be president, regardless of what they say.

MARK BRODIE: Well, and he’s not been shy about saying that he’s seriously thinking about it. I mean, to your point, a lot of a lot of people, especially before the midterm, will say, “Oh, I’m focused on the midterms, I’ll think about it at the proper time.” He has been very clear about saying, “I’m taking a serious look at it.”

MIKE HAENER: Yeah, and again, in this day and age, you have to. Twenty years ago, campaigns ended. Somebody was elected, and the campaign ended.

Now we just have endless campaigns. You’re constantly running. It doesn’t matter for what. You’re always on, and you’re always in campaign mode. You’re raising money, you’re going out to Iowa, you’re going out to wherever, you’re trying to build your network for whatever it happens to be that you think you might want to run for next.

MARK BRODIE: Yeah, interesting.

All right, guys. A couple minutes left. Daniel, I want to ask you about a story, a piece in the Washington Post late this week written by longtime columnist George Will, who is writing about your former boss, Gov. Doug Ducey, and it was sort of a fictitious campaign announcement for president from Gov. Ducey, what George Will imagined or maybe wanted Doug Ducey to say in his campaign announcement. And it seems like the general theme was, “I will make the presidency boring again.”

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Well, yes. George Will is in my view kind of the pope of conservatism. He spends a lot of time here in Arizona, he loves baseball, he’s written a couple books about it.

MARK BRODIE: He does.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: And he’s a big fan of Gov. Ducey, as am I. And I think he was painting a picture of what a lot of conservatives would like to see, which is a return to a very traditional conservatism that is not just conservatism in policy, but in style.

And I think Gov. Ducey and a lot of other governors represent that in how um how they conduct themselves and how they govern. So if the governor announces for president, I’ll be the first one to jump on board.

I don’t believe that’s going to happen. But I’m also not convinced — and this is me speaking, and he might not like me saying this — but I think he still has a lot to offer in some capacity in public service, whatever that is in the future. And he’s got a lot of good years ahead of him.

MARK BRODIE: When you say that what George Will wrote was something that a lot of conservatives are kind of longing for, do you think that would be enough conservatives for someone like Gov. Ducey to be successful in a Republican presidential primary?

DANIEL SCARPINATO: You know, somebody once described to me that when Americans elect a president, it’s kind of like when you get out of a bad relationship and you want the complete opposite. And so you look at OK, George W. Bush produces Obama. Obama produces Trump. Trump produces Joe Biden, etc.

And I do think that probably the next president might be somebody none of us are talking about and is probably going to be a very different kind of person, whether they’re Republican or Democrat.

MIKE HAENER: Yeah, and while I agree with Daniel at least on the point that I don’t think this is a conservative want. I think this is a lot of Americans want the presidency to be a little less in your face 24/7 and just go do your job and make my life better. And that’s not what’s happening today. The president is in your face 24/7, and he’s not making our lives any better or any easier.

MARK BRODIE: I’m going to paraphrase something that George Will wrote because I don’t have the piece right in front of me, but he basically said, “You’ll go weeks without even knowing I’m here.” Basically saying Gov. Ducey is the kind of candidate — and to Daniel’s point, maybe the kind of candidate that some or a lot of people want — to just sort of do the work, not on TV every day, not posting on social media every day, just kind of doing the job.

MIKE HAENER: That I think that’s what a lot of us want, again, whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, I I just don’t think we want this constant barrage of the president in your face.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: That’s why Mike and so many other Arizonans were such a fan of Gov. Ducey and his leadership.

MARK BRODIE: Speaking of tongue being firmly planted in cheek there. All right, we’ll have to leave it there. Mike Haener, Daniel Scarpinato, thanks to you both for the conversation, I really appreciate it.

DANIEL SCARPINATO: Thanks a lot.

MARK BRODIE: Good morning. It’s the Friday News Cap on KJZZ 91.5, I’m Mark Brodie. Coming up, a film festival in Nogales, Arizona features literal cross-border screenings. But first, once upon a time, Toni Robinson was a familiar face on the stage here in the Valley. But for the last decade, she stopped performing. Instead, she learned how to become a playwright. And now, she’s returning to the stage to perform her first play, a one-woman show called Between Masks and Mirrors. She came into our studios recently to talk more about it with my co-host, Lauren Gilger.

LAUREN GILGER: Let’s begin with the kind of long road to this performance, right? Because you were on stage often, a decade ago, but you took a long time off. Tell us, why, what that felt like? Did you miss it?

TONI ROBINSON: Oh, I definitely missed it. I think stepping away from the stage when that’s what you love and when it’s your passion is a really difficult thing to do, but it was a time of me going inward.

I think of it as an incubation, not a time away from the stage, but a time where I had an opportunity to start developing some other areas. So, I took classes, I worked on my writing skills, this is my first time being a playwright.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah.

TONI ROBINSON: So, it was an opportunity to develop and hone that as well.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah, and it sounds like you did a lot of those things in service of this project, which was sort of mulling in the background for that decade?

TONI ROBINSON: Yes, I have lived with these stories for years. I have and, you know, you want them to come out and I just wanted to do it well. I wanted to do a good job of bringing them to the world. And so that was an opportunity to really develop the characters, to think about who they are, to observe people, to get some nuanced information and to bring that all into the project.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah. OK, so it’s a one-woman show, your first play, as you said. That’s quite an an undertaking for your first play. Why a one-woman show?

TONI ROBINSON: Well, I’ve always loved the genre ever since I saw Whoopi Goldberg many, many years ago doing her one-woman show, I thought this is something I would love to do. And so, the other piece is when you’re a new playwright, it’s much easier to write for one person than to write for a lot of different characters.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah, I could see that.

TONI ROBINSON: So, that’s part of it, but I’m also fascinated with characters and people’s stories. And so doing it this way allows me to get into each individual person and allows the audience to kind of really understand the characters who are there and take their stories into consideration.

LAUREN GILGER: OK, so it is sort of a series of almost vignettes, right? Like it’s not one long play, it’s almost five separate character studies in a way. Do they tie together?

TONI ROBINSON: Yes. So they’re five distinct characters in five completely different scenarios. And the connection between them all is they’re all taking the courage to kind of look beneath the mask that they wear and confront who they really are.

I think that what you’ll see between the characters is that every one of them has a unique story, a unique situation, but they’re all sort of coming to realization like who they really are at this point in this juncture in their lives.

LAUREN GILGER: Right, so that’s an interesting way to thread them together because you have it sounds like a very diverse set of characters, like one is an ICE agent, another’s a person who uses a wheelchair, you’re playing men, you’re playing women, right? This is all kind of ages. Where do these characters come from?

TONI ROBINSON: So, they’re a compilation of people I’ve met along the way, of people I know, and then of me as well. So, I have a way of attracting stories and people to tell me their stories, and I started writing this as a way to share those stories.

The initial name was "Divine Encounters" because I just feel like I meet people and we connect and we have we share this moment of life together. And so, in doing that, I found myself in a lot of these stories. And so, that was kind of how I came up with the characters, is just pulling all these people and these situations together and also looking at society and some of the things going on in society as well, and bringing that into the story.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah, so I don’t want you to give it all away, but give us an example of how you kind of structure as a playwright, a one-woman show. Like are you talking to characters who aren’t there who you can hear? How do you set the scene? I mean, logistically, it sounds difficult.

TONI ROBINSON: It’s challenging, I will say that. And it’s funny because when you’re writing, you have all these visions in your mind of how it’s going to come out. And when you actually start going into production, it becomes a completely different thing.

So, one of the scenarios, it’s where the audience is actually the individual I’m speaking to. So that’s a really easy way to do it so that there’s no one else there.

In another one, we’re using some voiceover. So, you’ll hear other people in the conversation, you’ll hear my inner thoughts in that conversation as well, and then you’ll hear me speaking on stage. So, we’re using a variety of different ways to kind of bring that forward.

LAUREN GILGER: That’s really interesting. OK, but physically demanding, I’m guessing, because you are the only one on stage for I’m guessing a full-length, long show with maybe a break in the middle. Like that’s not a lot. What’s it been like to actually stage this, to put it on stage in real life? Is it exhausting?

TONI ROBINSON: It is exhausting, and I will tell you, I start my day every day going to the mountain for a hike.

LAUREN GILGER: OK.

TONI ROBINSON: And I’m doing that so I can get my stamina up to keep the energy throughout. And as I’m hiking, I’m actually saying my lines and moving because it is, and not having been on stage for a while, you forget the physicality that’s involved, right?

And there’s a lot of movement, and especially with the character who’s in a wheelchair, like just moving the wheelchair around the stage and doing that, it is it does take a lot of energy, it takes a lot of movement, but I’m actually really thrilled to be doing that.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah. Are you getting some weird looks on the mountain when you’re walking?

TONI ROBINSON: No, no. Everyone everyone’s kind of weird on the mountain, so it’s all good. It’s all good.

LAUREN GILGER: Does each performance come out differently?

TONI ROBINSON: It does, and that surprises me. Each practice comes out differently. I’ve been playing with voices, with accents, and as I get to know my characters even more, they bring forth things that I didn’t even think they would bring about. So, yeah, everyone is still a little different.

LAUREN GILGER: I love how you just talked about that like they’re separate from you in a way, like they take control when you’re when you’re embodying them.

TONI ROBINSON: They kind of do, yeah.

LAUREN GILGER: How does that work? What’s it feel like?

TONI ROBINSON: It feels like, for me, it’s like I’ve stepped out of observing, like being the participant observer and I am just truly the participant in that stage.

LAUREN GILGER: That’s amazing.

TONI ROBINSON: And that person. And to me, that also says that I’m finally giving this person voice and being authentic to who they are.

LAUREN GILGER: I love that. Do you have a favorite character you get to play in all this?

TONI ROBINSON: That’s a hard question. It’s hard because they’re all so different, and there are pieces of all of them that I really love.

I would say favorite character is probably the last one who is a mystic, a clairvoyant. And she’s just a lot of fun, she’s over the top, she’s energetic, she’s very interesting and very layered. So, that’s probably the favorite one because she brings this whole, this dimension of fun.

LAUREN GILGER: That sounds like fun, yeah. A clairvoyant, OK, cool.

So, the last thing I want to ask you about is I guess in the title and you’ve mentioned pieces of this throughout this conversation, but it sounds like what you’re trying to get at for yourself at least is and for your characters, is like how do you understand what kind of masks you’re presenting to the world. Is that the challenge you’re trying to give to your audience here as well?

TONI ROBINSON: I think I’m trying to ask the audience: Who are you when you take off the mask that you wear on the outside? And are you even aware that you’re wearing the mask? When did you put it on? How long have you been wearing it?

And if you take that off and you look at the person who’s there, is that someone that you identify with and you’re comfortable with? And then thinking about the people that we encounter, I want the audience to be curious about the people they encounter and who they are underneath the mask that they’re wearing.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah, strip us all back to our humanity a little bit.

TONI ROBINSON: Strip us back. Yeah, pull pull back the mask and just, you know, look at the reflection and just know that that’s a a beautiful reflection and if you want to change it, you can.

LAUREN GILGER: Masks and mirrors, OK. Toni Robinson, thank you so much.

TONI ROBINSON: Thank you.

MARK BRODIE: Toni Robinson’s one-woman show, "Between Masks and Mirrors," premiering Friday, and runs through this weekend at the Black Theatre Troupe’s Helen K. Mason Performing Arts Center.

MARK BRODIE: As usual, KJZZ contributor Robert Pela has something on his mind. This time, it’s about the growing trend in what Pela calls cyber-begging. He’s not a fan of the GoFundMe posts he’s seeing more and more of these days. Let’s hear him out.

ROBERT PELA: Look, I’m just going to say it: I hate GoFundMe.

You know — that whole digital passing-the-hat thing. It’s somehow become a kind of moral obligation to bankroll other people’s catastrophes, whims, and poor planning. The only thing I hate more than all this New World begging is the notion that, if I don’t pony up twenty bucks for someone’s dog’s gallbladder surgery, I’m the bad guy in the story.

It wasn’t always like this. Once upon a time, charity was a quiet thing. You slipped someone a check, or you brought over a casserole, or you helped them move because you thought of yourself as a good person, or maybe you were a good person, whatever that is. Sometimes the least anyone could hope for was that you were too polite to say “no.”

But now every misfortune, every inconvenience, every “I didn’t think this through” moment is turned into a glossy, emoji-laden plea for cash. And I understand that I’m supposed to feel bad because I don’t want to subsidize a stranger’s destination wedding or their kid’s gap year in Portugal.

I know, I know. Some people really need help. Of course they do. The world is full of medical emergencies and sudden tragedies. We all know people who’ve been dealt a hand so cruel it would make Charles Dickens blush. But somewhere along the way, the platform became less about need and more a kind of public performance of hardship, curated for maximum sympathy and minimum accountability. And I’m expected to pay for it. Literally.

I scroll through my social media feed and it’s a parade of financial nakedness. “Help me buy a new laptop.” No. “Help me fund my dream of becoming a DJ.” What? “Help me move to Los Angeles so I can pursue my passion for being discovered.”

These are not emergencies. These are things adults are supposed to figure out on their own, preferably without shaking down their social media acquaintances like a digital street busker.

Here’s the deal: These folks don’t need our help. They need a budget. Or a job. They need to stop treating their social circle like an ATM with a conscience.

If you’re outraged that I dare to have this opinion, that’s partly because this behavior has become so normalized. Someone posts a GoFundMe link and the comments fill with applause, as though asking for money is an act of bravery: “I’m so proud of you for reaching out. 😢” Proud of what? That they’ve discovered a way to monetize their misfortune? That they’ve outsourced personal responsibility to the kindness of others?

And don’t get me started on the performative gratitude — the “thanks to you” videos that look like hostage tapes filmed in a Hobby Lobby. This is transactional charity with a ring light.

Maybe what I hate most is the way that all this virtual begging has rewired our expectations of one another. I’m no longer just a friend or a colleague or someone you sat near in Earth Science class 50 years ago. I’m a potential donor. A revenue stream. A line item in your crisis budget. And if I don’t participate, if I don’t click the link and cough up a little something, I’m also…the villain. The cold-hearted miser. The man who hates dogs, and children, and helping others.

But here’s the truth: I work hard for my money. You think it’s easy to get on the radio and tell people to go to hell? Also, I budget. I plan. I save. I buy expensive insurance in case my spleen should burst or someone should run a red light and plow into my car. I make choices — sometimes unglamorous ones — so that I can take care of myself and the people I love. And I resent being made to feel like that’s not enough. That I’m supposed to bankroll the world because the world has decided that asking is easier than doing.

I know how this makes me sound. Like an old meanie. Fine. I’ll own it. I’ll be the cranky old guy, shaking his fist at the digital sky. But I refuse to feel guilty for not funding someone’s elective dental work or their dream of opening a vegan candle shop.

I’ll help when it matters. I’ll show up with a casserole, or a bucket when your basement floods. But I won’t be shamed into underwriting someone else’s life choices. I won’t be emotionally blackmailed by a platform that’s turned compassion into commerce.

And I won’t apologize for hating GoFundMe. I’ve earned that right.

MARK BRODIE: That was KJZZ contributor Robert Pela.

MARK BRODIE: Good morning, it’s The Show on KJZZ 91.5, I’m Mark Brodie. The Nogales International Film Festival is going on right now, and each night, events will culminate in a film screening that is truly cross-border. For their Film on the Fence initiative, organizers are putting the film screens on the border wall itself and gathering audiences on both sides to watch the same film at the same time. It’s a moment of shared experience in a place marked by division, and our next guest says Nogales is the only place it could be done.

Francisco Landin is managing director of the Nogales International Film Festival, and he says they’re showing a different feature film on the fence each night, including the new Netflix documentary “Selena y Los Dinos,” the episode of “Leguizamo Does America” where he goes to Phoenix, a few local short films and more.

The festival itself will be showing more than a hundred films throughout this weekend, in fact. My co-host, Lauren Gilger, spoke with Landin more about it.

FRANCISCO LANDIN: It’s very impactful to go to a city like Nogales. Nogales is one of the only cities in the world that is cut in half by a big border wall. It’s not a geographical divide like a river. It’s not one city on one side, one city on the other side. It is one city, it’s Nogales and there’s a big border that cuts right in the middle of it.

So you can see that happen with people’s everyday lives. If you go on on a Sunday, for example, you can see people having lunch with their family on the other side of the wall. Uh, you can see people taking pictures sometimes. I’ve seen pictures where, uh, high school graduates go and they’re, you know, a family members are on the other side of the wall and they take a picture with that person on the other side of the wall because they they can’t cross.

So, it is very much one city divided by this wall. So when you think about where does this festival fit the most perfectly, it is Nogales. You know, if if we go to El Paso and then do it in Juarez, it’s different. They’re two different cities.

Most of Texas has a river that’s dividing it. So, they’re ambos Nogales is what they call, or both Nogales. … So it makes perfect sense for the film event to also be like that, to also be two communities watching, having one event, watching one film uh to make sure that they stay united, this this despite this, you know, very clear physical divide between them.

LAUREN GILGER: So, talk about doing a film screening which you did for the first time last year, and you’re doing again this year at the festival where you have a screen on the border wall and audiences on both sides basically, right? Like this is pretty stark in its imagery.

FRANCISCO LANDIN: Right. It is, and you know, I use the word impactful a lot because it really is. So, what we do for the Film on the Fence event, we set two screens back to back against the border wall and we play the same film to both sides, so we you get to experience the community feeling of it with just the power of film and the power of having an an outdoor event. Seeing the wall as it is, if you’ve never seen the wall, it’s a very very giant concept to think about. Yeah. And seeing a screen reflected on somebody’s face across the border wall, watching the same thing that you’re watching at the same exact time, it has kind of an opposite effect, it has a very unifying effect and that’s why ambos Nogales is so important, because we’re all one Nogales, you know, we’re all one one people, so it’s a it’s a great way to kind of remind you of that despite, you know, all this barbed wire and these giant metal walls sticking out of the ground.

LAUREN GILGER: Right, and and so folks can understand this like if you’ve never seen the border wall, it is sort of these long metal bollards, 30 ft high, right? And so there are spaces in between them, small ones, but there are spaces so if you have a screen like you do here on on both sides playing the same film at the same time, you can you can see the people on the other side.

FRANCISCO LANDIN: Right. Yeah, you can see through it, it’s like a big grid like uh metal grid, so you can see people on the other side for sure, yeah, and you hear the the sound, you know, the film sound echoing off of the buildings on the other side.

LAUREN GILGER: Yeah, I’m sure people laugh at the same time, cry at the same time, all those things, right?

FRANCISCO LANDIN: Right, yeah exactly, we’re all experiencing the same event despite this this big wall that’s that’s just between us.

LAUREN GILGER: What was it like doing this for the first time last year, Francisco? Like, what do you remember a moment that, you know, made you really stop and say, wow?

FRANCISCO LANDIN: Yeah, you know, it’s when the film starts, I think that’s the that’s the best moment. You know, before that, people start showing up, and we have some announcements and everything is great, and then the film starts, And you see the sign come up, and you know, the sun is going down, and you get the feeling like, all right, the the event is happening now. What we’re here for is happening now and it’s just to enjoy the beautiful Nogales night, have a nice evening together, uh and that’s you know, kind of the key word is together, we’re doing all this all this together. And I think that’s that is the moment that I like the most. Um, that’s the moment where I get to stop and take a breath, Yeah. and you know, take it in, and not worry anymore about logistics or you know, things that are happening, this now I can watch a nice movie, and do it with the people that are on the other side of the wall.

LAUREN GILGER: You’re talking about this festival as growing into sort of a landmark event for Mexican-American film, for Latino film, and borderland cinema. Do you think that that borderland cinema has become a genre in its own right?

FRANCISCO LANDIN: Yeah, you know, and there very much is a genre for borderland cinema and a lot of people don’t see it because, you know, it’s not movies that are coming out necessarily, you know, it’s not every year that we get a movie like Sicario or like Traffic. But there are a lot of films and one of the most interesting things to me, I think, is for the European market, I can get a little industry. For the European market, border films are huge. Mhm. I think it’s so much of a good guys against bad guys aesthetics for them that it is actually a huge market. So, here in Arizona, we are building a corridor into Sonora for specifically for filmmaking and specifically for borderland filmmaking. Yeah. So, we are connecting on both sides to be sure that when when films come in and they want to shoot in Mexico and in the US, that it can be easier for them to do that because it is a genre on its own. I do think it’s something that people like to see, it’s very captivating to see border stories.

LAUREN GILGER: So, what are your hopes for this year as you do this event again and and continue to grow it?

FRANCISCO LANDIN: Really, uh we truly hope that people will come out and have a good time. Uh, you know, that’s why we do it, that’s why like I said, everything is free, that’s why we bring filmmakers, we budget for their flights, we budget for their rooms, because we want filmmakers to come from New York, from Miami, from LA, from Mexico City, who have never been to the border. We want them to experience the border and then we want them to tell people, "You know where we should shoot a film?" Hm. "In Southern Arizona, in Northern Mexico, by the border. It is beautiful there, the people are amazing." And we should keep coming back, and that that’s what we want really for the for the cities of Nogales, we want it to be looked at more as a art, film, and culture hub than as a border town.

LAUREN GILGER: All right. Francisco Landin, managing director of the Nogales International Film Festival joining us. Francisco, thank you so much for coming on the show, I really appreciate you taking the time.

FRANCISCO LANDIN: Thank you so much for having me.

MARK BRODIE: Thanks for listening to The Show’s podcast. The Show is produced by Sativa Peterson, Nick Sanchez, Amber Victoria Singer, Athena Onkra, and Ana Hamilton. The Show was created by John Hoban, our executive producer is Amy Silverman. You can find more of The Show and sign up for our newsletter at theshow.kjzz.org. You can also find us on Instagram @kjzztheshow.