Enforcement Actions - E

Enforcement Pages

Using the first letter of the individual’s last name, select the letter group below that corresponds. This will display enforcement actions for the corresponding letter group.

Enforcement Actions Form

Each page of the Enforcement Actions section is divided into subsections for citations, administrative actions, and convictions. You should check each subsection to see if an enforcement action has been taken against the individual you are seeking.

Citations

Jon F. Edelbaum

Santa Cruz—The Board issued a two-count citation that included a $1,500 administrative fine to Jon F. Edelbaum, architect license number C-31763, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code sections 5600.05(a)(1) (License Renewal Process; Audit; False or Misleading Information on Coursework on Disability Access Requirements); 5584 (Willful Misconduct) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(b)(2) (Failure to Respond to Board Investigation). The action alleged that Edelbaum certified false or misleading information on his 2019 License Renewal Application and failed to respond to the Board’s requests for information regarding his continuing education coursework within 30 days. The citation became final on July 30, 2020.

Tiger Edwards

Carmichael—The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $1,000 administrative fine to Tiger Edwards, dba Tiger Edwards Designs, an unlicensed individual, for an alleged violation of BPC 5536(a) and (b) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). The action alleged that on or about August 18, 2016, Edwards prepared drawings for a residential project located in Sacramento, California, and affixed a stamp to the drawings, which read: "ARCHITECTURL [sic] DESIGNER," "INDOOR RANGE" and "Tiger Edwards." The stamp was circular in shape and of a design used by licensed architects, pursuant to CCR 136. The citation became final on March 7, 2017.

William R. Edwards

Newport Beach—The Board issued a three-count citation that included a $3,000 administrative fine to William R. Edwards, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of BPC section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect) and California Code of Regulations (CCR), title 16, section 134(a) (Use of the Term Architect). On or about May 31, 2013, Edwards’ architect license number C-18607 expired. The action alleged that while Edwards’ license was expired, he maintained a business card, contract, billing invoices, and website with a business name, "Edwards Architectural Company," and wherein he described his services as "Architecture." Edwards also used the business name "Edwards Architectural Co." without having a California licensed architect who was in management control of the services that were offered and provided by the business entity and either the owner, a part-owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity. The citation became final on January 24, 2019.

Mark Egerstrom

Beverly Hills—The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $1,500 administrative fine to Mark Egerstrom, an unlicensed individual, for an alleged violation of BPC 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). The action alleged that Egerstrom put out a website, "markegerstrom.com" which states "Combining architecture and interior design, Mark strives to make each project he’s involved with become personal for both he and the client." The website contains a heading entitled, "CONTACT," and states "MARK EGERSTROM DESIGN AND ARCHITECTURE." The citation became final on August 24, 2015.

Sonia Ekmakji

Woodland Hills—The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $1,000 administrative fine to Sonia Ekmakji, dba Archi Tec, Archi.Tec, Archi-Tec, ArchiTec, and Architec1, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of BPC section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect) and California Code of Regulations (CCR), title 16, section 134(a) (Use of the Term Architect). The action alleged that on or about October 5, 2017, Ekmakji prepared a proposal to provide plans for a residential project in Valencia, California, which identified her business name as "ARCHI-TEC." Ekmakji subsequently prepared a set of drawings for the project that were submitted to the City of Santa Clarita Building and Safety Division in or around December 2017 to obtain a building permit. Ekmakji’s title block on the drawings stated "ARCHITEC DESIGN & REMODEL" and included the email address "ARCHITEC1@YAHOO.COM." In addition, on or about January 5, 2018, Ekmakji was issued a business tax registration by the City of Los Angeles under the business name "ARCHI TEC" and on or about January 10, 2018, Ekmakji submitted her business card to the Board, which included the business name "ARCHI.TEC" and the email address "ARCHITEC1@YAHOO.COM." Furthermore, on or about July 20, 2018, Ekmakji’s advertisement on the Internet at yellowpages.com under the business name "Architec1 - Sonia Ekmakji" was categorized under "Architectural Designers." Ekmakji also used the business names "Archi Tec," "Archi.Tec," "Archi-Tec," "ArchiTec," and "Architec1," which include an abbreviation or confusingly similar variation of the term "architect," without an architect who is in management control of the services that are offered and provided by the business entity and either the owner, a part-owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity. Ekmakji paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on November 5, 2018.

Sonia Ekmakji

West Hills—The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $2,000 administrative fine to Sonia Ekmakji, dba Archi-Tec, Archi-Tec Design and Remodling, Archi.Tec Designer, and Architec1, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). The action alleged that Ekmakji prepared a written contract to provide architectural services for a new recreation room by preparing plans through submittal and approval of permits and Title 24 clearance at her client’s home located in West Hills, California for a total “architectural fee” of $6,597.95. The agreement was signed in the name of “ARCHI-TEC DESIGN AND REMODLING.”

Ekmakji’s business card included the business name “ARCHI TEC” and the email address ARCHITEC1@YAHOO.COM. Ekmakji’s Yellow Pages profile included the business name “Architec1” and was categorized under “Architectural Designers” and her OpenGovUs profile was operating under the business name “Archi Tec Designer.” Ekmakji used the term “Arch” in her company names or description of services, without an architect who was in management control of the services that were offered and provided by the business entity and either the owner, a part-owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity, a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) as defined in California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134. Ekmakji paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on July 22, 2020.

Helmi El Senoussi

Las Vegas, NV—The Board issued a two-count citation that included a $3,500 administrative fine to Helmi El Senoussi, dba Bar International Design and Development Co., Inc. (Bar International), Bar Building Division, LLC, and The Development Bar, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). The action alleged that an auto and truck services company (client) hired El Senoussi and his company, Bar International, in September 2014, to design and engineer a 1,400 square foot gas station convenience store in Bell Gardens, California. The contract between the client and Bar International dated September 29, 2014, was signed by El Senoussi’s unlicensed partner, Michael Burke, as “Architect for Bar International Design & Development Inc.,” and promised schematic design, architectural sheets, and “plans finalized for architectural stamp.” Change orders dated October 14, 2014, October 30, 2014, January 8, 2015, February 10, 2015, and April 3, 2015, included an “Architect’s Project Number,” specified “Not valid until signed by architect,” and were signed by Michael Burke.

El Senoussi’s invoices to the client dated October 2, 2014, October 8, 2014, October 14, 2014, October 30, 2014, and November 13, 2014, itemized conceptual design, schematic design, and design development of “plans finalized for architectural stamp.” The company’s contract with an outside engineering firm dated March 5, 2015, designated Michael Burke of Bar International as the architect of record. Preliminary design sheets for the Bell Gardens project displayed a title block listing Commercial Design and Architecture under Bar International’s description of services. A design agreement between the client and Bar Building Division, LLC dated March 24, 2016, promised “Complete architectural drawings” and “All documentation for planning commission submittal.” El Senoussi used a contract signed by Michael Burke as Architect for Bar Building Division, LLC, Project Status Reports specifying “architectural/planning commission submittal,” and an Estimated Timeline for “complete architectural” services.

As new commercial construction, the designs for a gas station convenience store, restaurant, and expansion are not exempt from licensing requirements under Business and Professions Code section 5537. El Senoussi represented his company as an architectural firm, provided architectural services, and included architecture in his company’s description of services without an architect who was in management control of the services that were offered and provided by the business entity and either the owner, a part-owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity, which violated Business and Professions Code section 5536 and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134.

In or around February 2020, El Senoussi’s business, The Development Bar, maintained a website offering project management and design services and featured the design of the client’s gas station convenience store among its many commercial design accomplishments. By advertising non-exempt commercial architectural services through his company’s website, El Senoussi violated Business and Professions Code section 5536(a). The citation became final on March 11, 2020.

Wade Donovan Ellenberger

Brentwood—The Board issued a two-count citation that included a $1,500 administrative fine to Wade Donovan Ellenberger, architect license number C-29201, for alleged violations of BPC section 5600.05(a)(1) (License Renewal Process; Audit; False or Misleading Information on Coursework on Disability Access Requirements) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(b)(2) (Rules of Professional Conduct). The action alleged that Ellenberger failed to provide documentation to the Board from the course provider upon a Board audit and failed to respond to the Board’s requests for information regarding an investigation within 30 days. Ellenberger paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on October 2, 2018.

Alan Gregory Estrada

Pleasant Hill—The Board issued a two-count modified citation that included a $1,250 administrative fine to Alan Gregory Estrada, architect license number C-20258, for violations of Business and Professions Code sections 5584 (Negligence) and 5536.22(a)(4) and (5) (Written Contract) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(a)(2) (Professional Misconduct).

The action alleged Estrada executed a contract to obtain a building permit for a second dwelling unit remodel in Oakland, California. The contract was not executed by Estrada and did not include either a description of the procedure to accommodate additional services, or a description of the procedure to be used to terminate the contract.

The design for the project was rejected by the city of Oakland because the design did not meet setback and size requirements. Estrada had assumed the distance to the property line based on the location of a fence and failed to initiate a survey in order to determine the correct setback.

Estrada’s failure to initiate a survey prior to commencing the project, which resulted in the project being rejected by the city of Oakland, is a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5584 and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(a)(2).

Estrada’s failure to include all of the required elements in his written contract and his failure to execute it constitute violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536.22(a)(4) and (5). Mr. Estrada paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on August 28, 2020.  

Patricia N. Esposito

Loomis—The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $500 administrative fine to Patricia N. Esposito, architect license number C-25246, for an alleged violation of BPC section 5600.05(a)(1) (License Renewal Process; Audit; False or Misleading Information on Coursework on Disability Access Requirements). The action alleged that Esposito certified false or misleading information on her 2019 License Renewal Application. Esposito paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on January 23, 2020.

Administrative Actions

Steven A. Elmore

Santa Cruz—Effective July 24, 1999, Steven A. Elmore’s architect license number C-10809 was revoked; however, the revocation was stayed, his license was suspended for 90 days, and he was placed on probation for five years with specific terms and conditions, including reimbursing the Board $4,272 for investigative costs. An Accusation was filed against Mr. Elmore for violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536 (Practice without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). On December 31, 1991, Mr. Elmore’s license expired and was not renewed until December 31, 1996. The action was taken based on evidence that in November 1993 and June 1994, he entered into contracts to perform architectural services. On March 29, 1995, Board staff informed him that his license had expired, and that he was prohibited by law from practicing and/or representing himself as an architect until he renewed his license. On April 5, 1995, he contacted the Board and indicated that he would promptly mail his renewal fee, but failed to do so. In November 1995, the Board received information that he signed an architectural contract to design a house.

Convictions

There are no convictions to display.