Thursday, April 23, 2026
Home Blog Page 1377

Moved to America, got citizenship, defrauded State of Alaska of Medicaid dollars

34

AND THEN THERE’S THE BOOZE, METH, AND A STOLEN $364,756

Victor Aldeza, Regino Aldeza, and Albert Aldeza were keeping their lucrative crime business in the family for nearly a decade.

For years, they defrauded the Alaska Medicaid program of $364,756.70, by having one of them fake a disability so they could all mooch off the government.

They barely even tried to hide their scheme and the judge who sentenced them today said they showed no sign of stopping.

There were numerous counts against the Aldezas since their arrest in 2017, but in the end, the State accepted pleas for some of the felony counts, let them plead out on others, and they were sentenced today, ending the saga.

The irony is that once they start serving their prison time, they’ll have all their medical needs covered by the State of Alaska during their incarceration. If they need medical care outside the prison, that will be covered by … wait for it … Medicaid.

HOW THEY DID IT

The case is a textbook example of how Medicaid fraud occurs. It involves personal care assistants who are providing in-home care and being reimbursed by U.S. taxpayers through the Medicaid program.

The Alaska Medicaid program, as in most states, pays for PCA agencies to provide care to seniors or disabled people enrolled in Medicaid, and this allows the medically vulnerable person to remain in their own home rather than be placed in a long-term care facility.

A contract is worked out between the Department of Health and Social Services and the PCA agency to determine the number of hours and the exact sort of care the client needs, such as feeding, helping them use the toilet, bathing, and other daily needs.

Medicaid pays approximately $24 an hour to the PCA agency and the agency must pay the actual care provider at least half of that amount. Often, that provider is a member of the family.

This Alveda crime syndicate case involved various types of Medicaid fraud.

Travel billing fraud: When Medicaid is billed for services that could not have been provided because the provider or recipient was traveling out of country at the time for which the services were billed.

Faking health condition: This type of fraud is called malingering and it’s when a client exaggerates or fakes their health condition, and then colludes with the PDA agency or health care provider to continue billing for services that are not needed.

Time sheet fraud: Billing for services that could not have occurred when they said they occurred.

Arctic Care Services provides oversight for such PCA services. On March 18, 2017, an employee of Arctic Care Services was in the Dimond Mall food court in Anchorage, when he recognized Regino Aldeza working at the Charley’s Philly Steaks fast food restaurant.

That was odd, because Regino was listed as significantly disabled, a Medicaid recipient being taken care of by his personal care assistant, Victor Aldeza, who was employed by Arctic Care Services.

And yet, the Arctic Care Services worker observed Regino working normally and without any physical strain at the fast-food restaurant.

The records show that the Aldeza family was billing Medicaid for nearly full-time care — about 36.5 hours per week in assisting Regino with all aspects of his life — eating, locomotion, toileting, meal preparation, basic household chores, basic walking, and range of motion exercises, and personal hygiene.

Victor Aldeza, Regino Aldeza, and two powers of attorney George Aldeza and Alberto Aldeza had convinced Arctic Care and DHSS that Regino needed that full-time health care, including “six mobility transfers, eight locomotion events, two dressing events, three eating events, eight meal preps (seven ‘light’ meals and one ‘main’ meal), six toilet uses, one personal hygiene, one ‘shopping’ event, and two vital sign checkups.”

Victor, George, Albert and their sister were billing all or nearly all of these services every day for years by submitting time sheets to Arctic Care, saying services had been performed for Regino. In his weekly case notes, Victor was supposed to indicate if there was any improvements or declining Regino’s health. He always wrote no, no change for better or worse.

And yet, there was Reginoonce again on March 21, 2017, working hard a the mall, moving heavy objects, conversing normally, using the cash register to make change, preparing meals quickly in a fast-food environment. He was driving to and from work, and walking to and from his car. He was changing into and out of his uniform.

There was nothing wrong with Regino Aldeza.

Well, except the alcohol and meth problem, and the domestic violence charges and violating conditions of release resulting from that episode. He was in and out of jail a bit, but the bills kept on coming.

A search warrant into Regino’s medical records showed that he had, indeed, developed a single canker sore, and had dizzy spells after he took up smoking meth. He had the occasional bout of gout and headaches. He had a several-week episode of going to the emergency room for various maladies related to meth. Yes, he had a history of an aneurysm but no medical professional had noted a disabling medical condition. His last followup for his aneurysm was in 2008.

On March 29, 2017, the Medicaid Fraud Unit assigned the case and the investigator reviewed and confirmed that Regino had worked at fast food restaurants since 2015, and had worked at Wrightway Auto Carriers in 2012. Regino had obtained a fishing and hunting license for years, received a speeding ticket in 2012 in Kenai, and had been arrested for assault. He lost his passport because he was delinquent on his child support.

The investigator also found that while Victor was billing for taking care of Regino, Victor was at times out of the country, or was billing for times when Regino was working away at his fast-food job, as shown on Dimond Mall surveillance video, or when he was in the custody of the Department of Corrections.

The entire fraud timeline took place between 2009 and 2017, when the long arm of the law caught up with the Aldezas.

The three defendants entered pleas to felony fraud and theft counts. On Thursday, Judge Catherine Easter sentenced Victor and Regino Aldeza to identical sentences of five years with two and half years suspended, probation five years.  She sentenced Albert Aldeza to four years, with two suspended, probation five years. All were ordered to reimburse the state Medicaid program $364,000 in restitution.  

Assistant Attorney General Eric Senta argued that the Aldezas’ scheme victimized a state program with extremely limited funding, stealing money intended to pay for disabled children’s wheelchairs and compassionate end-of-life care for the state’s sick and elderly. 

The defendants, from the Philippines originally, have significant ties out of the country. Regino immigrated to the U.S. in 1985, and became a citizen in 2008, George immigrated around 2016, and Victor Aldeza routinely travels out of the country. All listed the same residence on their drivers licenses — a home owned by Victor.

Judge Easter stated that the defendants had been signing fraudulent documents at least twice a month for years and if not for an alert case worker who tipped off the state’s Medicaid Fraud Unit, the fraud would have continued indefinitely, a fraud that she said was motivated by pure greed.

Public forum: 5% university tuition increase next fall

UAF CHANCELLOR TAKES LEADERSHIP ROLE IN BUDGET DISCUSSION

Chancellor Dan White of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, has taken a lead role and models transparency in the University of Alaska system, updating his academic community weekly with reports on how his campus is handling its budget challenge.

Systemwide, the University of Alaska is required to make $25 million in cuts this year, and the same amount in the next fiscal year. The University of Alaska Fairbanks campus has lost $12.3 million in state support; the University of Alaska Anchorage has lost $9.1 million; and the University of Alaska Southeast and remote campuses have about $4 million less to work with.

White’s weekly reports are unique — neither chancellors at the Anchorage or Juneau campus come close to what White is executing in addressing the budget cuts in specific, productive, practical, and public ways.

UAF is considering these measures, White said in his last weekly update:

  • Closing one or two of the underground mines used for student training.
  • Replacing one of three greenhouses with a temporary structure or alternative for seasonal high-volume work.
  • Reducing activities at two of the campus-owned farms.
  • Increasing revenues by monetizing parcels for lease or sale.
  • Converting the Kotzebue campus to a learning center.
  • Alternative uses or operating models for the Large Animal Research Station.
  • Assessing the Kodiak Seafood and Marine Science Center.

In the days ahead, the chancellor wrote, campus leaders will return to the strategic planning documents that were put on hold during the discussion of the reorganization of the entire university system. Before that reorganization discussion, which prompted concern by the university’s accrediting organization, the strategic planning task forces had prepared reports and were ready for public comment on various plans.

UNIVERSITY-FAIRBANKS BUDGET FORUM IS TUESDAY, DEC. 3

The next event in the budget discussion is a tuition forum on Dec. 3 to talk about a proposed tuition increase. The forum is being held from 1-2 pm in cooperation with the ASUAF student government and will take place in the Wood Center ballroom.

At issue is the 5 percent increase UA President Jim Johnsen has proposed for the fall of 2020 in order to offset some of the State’s reductions to the UA unrestricted general fund. At their November meeting, the Board of Regents delayed action on that proposal, after comment from student leaders.

“My thanks to ASUAF for catalyzing this discussion, and for all they do in bringing the student voice to decisions at our university. I continue to be amazed at the thoughtfulness of UAF’s student governance leadership. UAF students and we in leadership are lucky to have them,” White wrote.

The Board of Regents delayed action at the November meeting on UA President Jim Johnsen’s proposal for a 5 percent increase to the upper- and lower-division rates of tuition for fall 2020. This increase would partially offset the reductions to UA’s unrestricted general fund.

The forum will be webstreamed and captioned. Those who have limited internet access can listen at 866-832-7806, participant PIN: 2844780. (Please mute your phone, and do not use the hold function during this event.)

Interested parties may submit questions or comments in advance.

The UAS tuition/budget forum is Dec. 2 at 4 pm; and the UAA forum is Dec. 6. Both forums will be web streamed.

FROM FREEZERS TO OUTDATED EQUIPMENT, TIME TO MOVE ON

White identified that among expenses that could be trimmed are freezers. The campus has 617 known freezers that cost the campus more than $300,000 per year in electricity, not including the space they occupy or maintenance on the units. The chancellor said the freezers hold samples that, in some cases, will never be run.

“I know — I kept samples of organic matter in water for more than a decade, just in case,” he wrote, reminiscing on his work as a research professor.

White said the goal of preserving academic and research programs can be met by lowering the university’s operating costs for “space and stuff that we could use better.”

And that includes information technology, such as obsolete video conferencing equipment that “occupies physical and psychological space.”

White takes an encouraging tone in his weekly reports. If he’s worried, he doesn’t show it:

“As we chart our path forward, I encourage you to look forward. What do we need on our journey? What will slow us down, and what, like that old piece of water testing equipment, keeps us looking back?  Every time we look back we are not looking where we are going. If there are spaces we can clear out so that we can reduce capital costs, reduce operations and maintenance, or reduce deferred maintenance, we will be more efficient and more effective. And we need it because we need people. Old outdated equipment, not so much.”

At the Anchorage campus, Chancellor Cathy Sandeen has published a schedule for the strategic planning process, and campus leaders are working through that schedule. Public comment on that plan is due today.

But compared to the UAF chancellor’s approach the UAA campus communications are less specific about how they might find cost savings. The updates are few and far between, difficult to find, and lacking in specifics.

At University of Alaska Southeast in Juneau, Chancellor Rick Caulfied has done little to update the public about how his campus will reduce expenditures. The updates on the school’s web page are generally outdated. More prominent is the “Call to Action” update, where he encourages the public to protest the cuts. If UAS is looking for cost savings, it’s not easy to tell how.

The chancellors in Anchorage and Juneau do video messages and meet in person with their campus community, according to a source in the university administration. They just don’t put out a notice the way White does. President Jim Johnsen sends out a weekly newsletter to the employees throughout the system, including budget news.

All campuses will have to manage yet another $25 million budget cut in the 2021 budget that will be announced by Gov. Mike Dunleavy on or before Dec. 15, when by statute it is due. That fiscal year starts in just 217 days.

Uniquely vulnerable to corruption?

THE ANCHORAGE DAILY PLANET

In an unsigned opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court has told the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its opinion upholding Alaska’s $500 limit on annual campaign contributions.

The high court vacated the 9th Circuit’s decision upholding the $500 limit, saying the appellate judges who rejected the lawsuit by three Alaskans failed to consider a 2006 ruling by the Supreme Court against low contribution limits on political campaigns in Vermont.

The court, which said in Citizens United v. FEC, that campaign expenditures by independent entities were constitutionally protected political speech, seemed unimpressed with Alaska’s campaign finance law. They are, the court said, squeezed by inflation and are more than 23 years old. Add to that: Alaska’s individual-to-candidate contribution limit is substantially lower than other states.

Oddly, while Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg went along with remanding the case to the 9th Circuit, she wrote a separate, disturbing opinion.

She noted Alaska’s reliance on resource development, specifically the oil industry, may make the state more prone to political corruption, and so that may justify the low limits.

She said, “Alaska has the second smallest legislature in the country and derives approximately 90 percent of its revenues from one economic sector—the oil and gas industry. As the District Court suggested, these characteristics make Alaska “highly, if not uniquely, vulnerable to corruption in politics and government.”

Because of that, Ginsberg said, Alaska is particularly vulnerable and the lower limit may be justified.

Incredible. We are left to wonder what she thinks about campaign limits in states such as Nevada, with its reliance on gambling, or Michigan, with its automotive industry, or Florida, with its income from the tourism industry. Alaska is far from “uniquely” vulnerable to corruption from business or industry.

It is disquieting, even insulting, for a Supreme Court justice to assume the oil and gas industry in Alaska is corrupt or endorses corruption and, because of that, making it harder for Alaskans to contribute to the candidates of their choice may be in order. That does not even make sense.

So much for the quaint notion of sensible laws applied equally.

Shopping season: Homer City Council shops for new judge in election-residency case

6

The City Council of Homer is preparing to legally defend its decision to seat a council member about whom questions were raised concerning her legitimacy as a candidate.

But the first order of business for Homer? Get a different judge.

Superior Court Judge Andrew Guidi had been assigned to the election-related case, the first hearing of which was scheduled for Dec. 3 in Anchorage. But in a motion filed last week, the defendants — Homer City Council — asked for some other judge. That was assigned today: Judge Josie Garton.

Guidi is a judge who constitutionalists prefer, as he is less of an activist than some others on the Anchorage Superior Court. Garton has served on the court for 18 months, having been appointed by Gov. Bill Walker.

The lawsuit was filed by a former council member, Tom Stroozas, who discovered that Storm Hansen-Cavasos had not been living inside the municipal boundaries for the 12 months prior to the election, therefore the council swearing her in was a violation of the city code.

Homer’s attorneys, Michael Gatti and Mary Pinkel, have also asked that the court extend the time they have to file a response to Stroozas’ request for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction.

Update: The court has since changed the date of the hearing to Dec. 5.

Frank Turney, Fairbanks candidate, Bill of Rights advocate, passes

14

A well-known figure in the political scene of Fairbanks has passed. Frank Turney died unexpectedly, his family announced on Monday.

He had run for mayor three times, most recently during the October, 2019 election, always calling himself a “conscience awareness candidate” who wanted issues of public importance brought to light. He was not as concerned about winning, and in the Oct. 1 election, won 84 votes, or 2 percent of ballots cast. Turney had also run for city council several times, also never winning. He never raised enough money in any of his races to qualify for a report to Alaska Public Offices Commission.

Politically, Turney couldn’t be put into a box, but he was a super voter who never missed an election, and he had Libertarian leanings. He was passionate about jury rights issues and jury nullification. He defended religious liberties of those bakers who don’t want to bake cakes for gay weddings. He advocated for less lethal force by police, more public restrooms for downtown Fairbanks, and

Turney was also an advocate for legal cannabis, and also was outspoken in support of the exoneration of Schaeffer Cox, a Fairbanks man who was convicted in 2012 on nine felony counts related to conspiracy to murder federal officials. Cox is serving his sentence in Terre Haute, Indiana.

He was charged with jury tampering in 1994, after continuously making a scene at the Fairbanks Courthouse and being cautioned in a letter by the court administrator to not harass people coming and going from the courthouse. His case went to the Alaska Supreme Court, which upheld a conviction for disorderly conduct, but reversed his conviction for second-degree trespass.

[Read: Turney v. State]

Turney came to Fairbanks from Cherryville, Oregon in 1982 and became a snow shoveler during that winter when it snowed 91 inches. He continued that work through the years, and was known as “Frank the Snow Shoveler,” mainly working in the downtown area, clearing walks, driveways, parking lots and roofs. He also worked at the cemetery for 16 years.

Turney attended nearly every meeting of the Fairbanks City Council over many years and provided public testimony on agenda items at nearly every meeting. His death was announced during the city council meeting on Monday night.


John Pence is keynote speaker for ARP Unity Gala

5

John Pence, senior adviser to President Donald Trump’s campaign, will deliver a keynote address at the first annual Alaska GOP Unity Gala. Pence is the nephew of Vice President Mike Pence and is married to the cousin of Kelleyanne Conway.

The Unity gala will be held  December 6 at the Dena’ina Center in Anchorage. Tickets here.

As senior adviser to President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign, Pence works closely with the White House’s Office of Political Affairs and the Republican National Committee to organize the President’s political activities and grassroots initiatives. Pence also advises the campaign on operations, fundraising, digital advertisement, and software development.

Pence grew up in Indiana and earned an undergraduate degree from the College of William and Mary, a law degree from Indiana University Maurer School of Law, and a business degree from New York University.

Prior to joining the Trump Campaign, Pence focused on corporate law in Indiana and worked in several Latin American countries as a researcher and English teacher. He is fluent in Spanish and Portuguese. His father is Congressman Greg Pence of Indiana’s 6th Congressional District.

Supreme Court puts Alaska judge’s $500 campaign contribution limit in doubt

8

The U.S. Supreme Court today threw a big question mark on Alaska’s $500 limit on annual campaign contributions.

In the case of Thompson vs. Hebdon (the Alaska Public Offices Commission), the high court threw the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to review their work, and the high court vacated the lower court’s decision upholding the $500 limit.

The Supreme Court decision implies that the $500 campaign limit in Alaska is invalid, but it would likely take a court injunction to stop it from being in effect, since it is in statute and the Alaska Public Offices Commission is bound to uphold it.

The high court said that the Ninth Circuit judges who had rejected the lawsuit by three Alaskans failed to consider a 2006 ruling by the Supreme Court against low contribution limits on political campaigns in Vermont. That state has since adjusted its contribution limit to $1,000.

In their lawsuit, Alaskans Jim Crawford, Aaron Downing, and David Thompson said they each donated $500 to campaigns, and wanted to donate more, but were stopped by the Alaska law prohibiting contributions of over $500. They took it to court and now-Attorney General Kevin Clarkson was their attorney.

Today, Clarkson is the one who must argue for preserving the law limiting contributions to campaigns, while arguing against Clarkson is his old law partner Robin Brena, who has become the new attorney for the group suing over the $500 limit, although a leading attorney in Washington, D.C. is the one who is handling the case.

Jim Crawford said it is a case of keen importance to conservatives in Alaska.

“Importantly, we tied our case to Citizens United and the free speech argument,” said Crawford. “What I want is a level playing field. I don’t want the labor guys to be able to contribute $2,500 to a campaign and individuals can’t. We’ll lose every single race so long as we have unions and liberals out there that have the financial advantage.”

“We’ve been trying this case for four years. The win at the U.S. Supreme Court is very, very solid. They seem bound by the precedent of Citizens United, and now we get a level playing field,” Crawford said.

The court, in its unsigned decision, seemed generally unimpressed with Alaska’s campaign finance laws:

“Alaska’s contribution limit is not adjusted for inflation. We observed in Randall that Vermont’s ‘failure to index limits means that limits which are already suspiciously low’ will ‘almost inevitably become too low over
time.’ The failure to index ‘imposes the burden of preventing the decline upon incumbent legislators who may not diligently police the need for changes in limit levels to ensure the adequate financing of electoral
challenges.’ So too here. In fact, Alaska’s $500 contribution limit is the same as it was 23 years ago, in 1996.”

The Supreme Court also noted Alaska’s individual-to-candidate contribution
limit is substantially lower than comparable limits in other States.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a separate opinion, but even she said she didn’t oppose remanding this case back to the Ninth Circuit.

She stated that Alaska’s reliance on resource development, specifically the oil industry, may make the state more prone to political corruption, and so that may justify the low limits.

“I do not oppose a remand to take account of Randall v. Sorrell,” she wrote. “I note, however, that Alaska’s law does not exhibit certain features found troublesome in Vermont’s law. For example, unlike in Vermont, political parties in Alaska are subject to much more lenient contribution limits than individual donors. Moreover, Alaska has the second smallest legislature in the country and derives approximately 90 percent of its revenues from one economic sector—the oil and gas industry. As the District Court suggested, these characteristics make Alaska “highly, if not uniquely, vulnerable to corruption in politics and government.” Ginsberg said Alaska is a special case and may warrant such a limit as the law currently provides.

Video: Chad Bentz returns to Juneau to teach, NFL film company notices

3

You’re dose of inspiration for the day, and this one will carry you through the week. It’s the story of Chad Bentz, Juneau-Douglas Crimson Bear football player, major league baseball player, and history maker: On April 7, 2004, he became the second pitcher to play in the majors after being born without one of his hands.

Two judges, two decisions: Can Alaska’s governor call a special session in Wasilla?

41

A Fairbanks Superior Court judge said he’s leaning toward dismissing a lawsuit by a Republican former lawmaker against Senate President Cathy Giessel and House Speaker Bryce Edgmon for not convening a special session in Wasilla, as determined by the governor this summer.

But while Judge Michael MacDonald said he believes Al Vezey, the former legislator from North Pole, doesn’t have standing to bring a lawsuit, an Anchorage Superior Court judge has accepted a mirror-image lawsuit by two Democrats against Gov. Mike Dunleavy for calling the special session in Wasilla.

Anchorage attorneys Mary Geddes and Kevin McCoy filed the lawsuit against Dunleavy on behalf of themselves. They do have standing, said Anchorage Superior Court Judge Josie Garton.

These cases are two sides of the same coin, dealing with whether a governor has the right to determine the location of a special session that he calls — a duty granted to him in a statute passed in 1959.

And they both are passing through the determination of whether the plaintiffs have “standing” to bring such a lawsuit.

While the judge in Anchorage decided the Democrat plaintiffs have standing, the judge in Fairbanks wants more proof from the Republican plaintiff that he can bring such a lawsuit — or else the judge says he will probably dismiss it.

On Friday, Anchorage Superior Court Judge Garton said that although the dispute over that particular special session is over, there is an underlying question that hasn’t been decided, which is why she wants the case to go forward: Does the governor of Alaska have the authority to not only call a special session, but to name the location? Or is that unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers between the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch of government.

Garton, in a 27-page order, denied the State’s attempt to have the case dismissed on the grounds of standing.

Garton noted that there are different kinds of standing and that Geddes and McCoy are in the citizen-taxpayer category. This “standing” measure was part of the argument the State made in an effort to have this case dismissed.

Although the governor eventually capitulated and moved the special session to Juneau, where it was conducted and concluded, the question of the constitutionality of his first special session call is what the case is about. Attorneys Geddes and McCoy amended their original lawsuit and are now seeking a declaratory judgment that the governor overstepped his constitutional authority.

The State argued to the Anchorage judge that the whole issue was a political dispute and those disputes should not be decided by a court.

Garton wrote that while both parties agree the issue is moot because the governor ultimately amended his proclamation and moved the special session to Juneau, this matter rises to the level of “public interest,” which is an exception to the “mootness doctrine.”

But back in Fairbanks, Judge MacDonald requested that both parties in that lawsuit issue briefs about whether Vezey has legal standing.

“Unless the plaintiff is able to establish that he has either interest-injury or citizen-taxpayer standing, this Court will be obliged to dismiss the case due to lack of subject-matter jurisdiction,” MacDonald wrote. MacDonald has said that Vezey’s “public interest” standing argument is no good.

Vezey, through his attorney William Satterberg, is now trying the citizen-taxpayer argument.

The brief by Giessel and Edgmon’s attorney argue that Vezey doesn’t have that standing either, nor any other.

“Mr. Vezey’s Complaint fails to identify any interest of his that was adversely affected by the Defendants’ conduct here. Instead, he points out that the only persons who were allegedly adversely affected were those legislators who assembled in Wasilla — not Mr. Vezey. There is no indication, evidence, or even allegation that the location of the special session was likely to — or did — cause Mr. Vezey any sort of harm.”

But Vezey wrote that he pays taxes and fees for his professional licensing, pays for his state-mandated continuing education, pays taxes through purchases of motor, aviation, and marine fuel, and has numerous other dealings with the State of Alaska as a business owner. Beyond that, he’s received a Permanent Fund Dividend every year since 1982.

These things, he wrote, give him standing as a citizen-taxpayer, especially since the Legislature has chosen to curtail dividends and use a portion of them for government during the past three cycles of the oil wealth check, rather than issue them in full to qualified citizens.

Judge MacDonald is considered left-leaning and if he decides against accepting Vezey as a valid plaintiff, the case will likely be appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court.

(Editor’s note: Mary Geddes is a registered Democrat and her co-plaintiff Kevin McCoy is a registered Nonpartisan; they share the same address and both signed the petition to recall the governor. For these reasons, they are referred to as Democrats in this story.)