Forecasters do not expect a major temperature drop, but they expect a noticeable change after the wet conditions.

“We’ll get the tail-end of this front, so it won’t be a substantial cooldown by any means…but it will be a noticeable one,” the National Weather Service said in its forecast discussion Saturday.

The front could push Houston’s overnight temperatures into the 60s and low 70s for most of the workweek. Forecasters currently estimate a 70% to 75% chance that Houston temperatures will fall below 70 degrees.

Daytime temperatures will remain in the 80s through next week, but drier air behind the front should reduce rain chances across the area for most of the workweek.

Rain expected through the weekend

Houston will face several rounds of showers and thunderstorms through Sunday before the front arrives.

The National Weather Service expects locally heavy rain, with the highest chances along the coast. Coastal areas could receive 1 to 3 inches of rain from Saturday through early next week, while areas farther inland will generally receive less than an inch.

Forecasters said isolated areas could receive higher amounts. The heaviest rainfall should remain 10 to 20 miles offshore, although a slight northward shift could bring more rain into coastal and inland communities.

The Weather Prediction Center has placed Southeast Texas under a marginal risk, or Level 1 of 4, for excessive rainfall Saturday and Sunday. The greatest flooding threat will remain near the coast.

Monday will serve as a transition day, with rain chances continuing along the coast before the cold front moves through overnight.

The cooler and drier conditions should arrive Tuesday and continue through much of the workweek.

Texas bans abortion except in limited circumstances, including when a pregnant woman faces a risk to her life or a major bodily function. Before lawmakers passed Senate Bill 31 in 2025, physicians and reproductive health advocates argued that the law did not clearly define when a medical emergency qualified for the exception.

Doctors who violate the abortion ban can face fines of up to $100,000, loss of their medical licenses and prison time.

Physicians pushed lawmakers to clarify the law. Dr. Deborah Fuller, a Dallas-based OB-GYN, told lawmakers during a hearing on the House version of SB 31 that she believed the measure could help save women’s lives.

After lawmakers debated and amended the bill, the Legislature passed it with bipartisan support.

The law clarified that a patient’s death or impairment does not have to be “imminent” before a doctor can intervene. It also allows physicians to discuss abortion with patients and other doctors while determining appropriate treatment.

SB 31 did not eliminate penalties for physicians who violate the abortion ban. However, it established that prosecutors must prove that “no reasonable doctor” would have provided an abortion under the circumstances.

Fuller said the law has eased some physicians’ concerns when they make emergency medical decisions. She said many patients, however, remain unaware of the protections and exceptions under state law.

“Most of [my patients] have not heard of it,” Fuller said.

Campaign aims to educate patients

Fuller now serves on the advisory committee for “Asking for a Mom,” a campaign designed to educate pregnant women and their families about Texas abortion laws, including the Life of the Mother Act.

The Texas Campaign for Mothers, a nonprofit that lobbied for SB 31, operates the campaign. The organization describes itself as nonpartisan.

The campaign provides information through its website and distributes flyers for doctors to display or provide to patients. The materials explain circumstances in which Texas law allows or prohibits abortion and outline steps patients can take if they encounter barriers to care.

Fuller said the resources could help patients understand their options when speaking with OB-GYNs and emergency room physicians.

“In an obstetrical emergency, it would be very unusual for someone to access a law to find out, ‘Oh, what is and what isn’t happening? What is and isn’t covered? Where am I in this legislation?’” Fuller said.

Doctors receive new training

SB 31 also requires OB-GYNs, emergency room physicians and family medicine doctors in Texas to complete online education about the state’s abortion laws when they renew their medical licenses.

The Texas Medical Board’s training covers several emergency scenarios, including treatment involving a pregnant patient with cancer who needs chemotherapy.

Because physicians renew their licenses every two years, some doctors have not yet completed the required course. “Asking for a Mom” has responded with in-person training sessions at medical schools and clinical settings.

Central Texas OB-GYN Dr. Charles Brown has participated in the effort and said in-person sessions give doctors an opportunity to discuss questions that may not receive enough attention in an online course.

Brown said he has visited at least a dozen medical residency programs. He said physicians generally ask legal questions rather than medical ones.

“All the OB-GYN doctors know what to do,” Brown said. “They need to have the confidence they can legally do it.”

The Texas Medical Board’s training says physicians can rely on reasonable medical judgment during emergencies. The guidance defines that judgment as a decision from a reasonably prudent physician who understands the patient’s condition and available treatments.

The training also says physicians do not need medical certainty or agreement from every doctor before making an emergency treatment decision.

Some doctors still question the law

Despite the new law and training, some Texas physicians continue to argue that the emergency exception remains unclear.

Dr. Damla Karsan, a Houston OB-GYN who has challenged Texas’ abortion restrictions in court, said SB 31 did not address all of the concerns raised by physicians. She also pointed to the law’s exclusion of lethal fetal anomalies.

Karsan said uncertainty could continue to cause doctors to delay treatment.

“I think there’s still so much fear,” she said. “If providers aren’t 100% certain, they’re going to delay.”

Brown also said he encounters legal questions that fall outside his expertise. He said he directs physicians to hospital or legal counsel when they seek interpretations of specific legal obligations.

Questions remain about delays in care

The debate over emergency abortion care has continued as physicians and advocates examine cases involving delayed treatment.

A recent ProPublica investigation reported that deaths associated with ectopic pregnancies doubled between 2020 and 2025, with higher rates in states with strict abortion restrictions, including Texas. Ectopic pregnancies occur when an embryo implants outside the uterus and can cause life-threatening complications.

Texas law allows doctors to terminate ectopic pregnancies, and SB 31 specifically addresses the treatment.

A federal investigation previously found that a Williamson County hospital failed to promptly treat a woman’s ectopic pregnancy in 2023. The pregnancy later ruptured, and doctors removed her fallopian tube.

The Texas Tribune also reported in June that an Austin-area woman filed federal complaints against several hospitals over treatment she received for a miscarriage in October 2025. The woman alleged that delays placed her health at risk.

The Texas Medical Board’s training states that removing the products of a miscarriage remains legal.

It could take years before researchers have enough data to determine whether SB 31 and the required physician training have changed emergency care outcomes across the state.

The Texas Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee releases pregnancy-related mortality data on a delayed schedule. The committee plans to release data from 2024 in December after skipping reports covering 2022 and 2023.

Texas Health and Human Services data show that doctors performed 68 abortions under the state’s exception during the first six months of 2026, compared with 62 during the same period in 2025.

Brown said more time and data will show how effectively the law works.

“Time will tell,” Brown said. “But I’m trying to make it as effective as it can be.”

At least two other cities and one county — Addison, New Braunfels and Johnson County — also received extensions that allow them to keep cameras funded through state grants, according to local government presentations and agency statements.

Local officials in those communities said they likely would have shut down the affected cameras without Flock’s payment pause.

The 90-day arrangement comes as Abbott’s office has not said how long the state funding freeze will remain in place. Some local officials have expressed hope that state funding will resume after the Nov. 3 election.

“We’re so close to that November election that I think it would be a little premature for us to pull the plug without seeing where this is going to go,” Johnson County Commissioner Rick Bailey said during a Sept. 14 meeting.

Bailey later told the Texas Tribune that he viewed the funding pause as political.

Abbott’s office did not respond to questions about Flock’s decision to suspend payments or whether the state plans to restore funding.

Abbott halted state funding for Flock cameras in late August after the Texas Tribune reported that a state agency had directed at least $30 million toward more than 3,200 cameras across Texas.

The funding freeze has since led cities and counties to shut down hundreds of cameras. Abbott also directed the Texas Department of Transportation to pause the installation of new license plate readers along state roads and highways, although existing cameras can remain operational.

Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based company, has not said whether its 90-day extensions apply statewide or depend on individual agreements.

Dallas keeps cameras operating

The 90-day payment pause will allow Dallas to restore nearly half of its Flock camera network.

Dallas police had said earlier in September that the department would unplug the cameras without state grant funding. Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley met with Dallas police Wednesday, after which the department announced that the grant-funded cameras would remain operational.

A Dallas police spokesperson said the department did not have additional information about what will happen to the cameras after the 90-day period.

Flock’s arrangement allows affected departments to maintain access to their cameras without making payments during the 90-day period while they look for other funding sources.

In Addison, Police Chief Chris Freis told the City Council that the department met with Flock on Sept. 10 and learned about the payment pause.

“Flock is very much seemingly taking the advice of, sit and wait and see what shakes out at the state level and then go from there,” Freis said.

Officials in Addison, New Braunfels and Johnson County said Flock also told them they could leave contracts for affected cameras without penalties if state funding does not return after the 90-day pause.

Cities weigh costs after state funding freeze

All four jurisdictions receiving the extensions used reimbursement grants from the Motor Vehicle Crime Prevention Authority to fund their Flock cameras. The authority operates under a board largely appointed by Abbott.

The funding freeze has also affected communities that already spent local money on camera contracts while expecting reimbursement through the state grant program.

Johnson County said it had about $500,000 in local taxpayer money committed to the cameras while awaiting reimbursement.

Other communities have already removed their cameras. El Paso City Council members voted to take down 150 cameras funded through the vehicle authority, while 13 other cities and counties have also shut down cameras since Abbott imposed the funding freeze.

The state-funded network also includes more than 900 Flock cameras operated by the Texas Department of Public Safety. More than 3,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide accessed data from those cameras during June, with searches occurring as frequently as every four seconds, according to the Texas Tribune.

DPS has said it will keep its existing cameras but has not explained how long they will remain operational or how the agency will fund them. A $15 million contract with the vehicle authority covered almost all of DPS’ more than 900 cameras, and the agency had planned to install hundreds more before the funding freeze.

Debate over surveillance continues

Flock cameras capture information from passing vehicles, including license plate data, vehicle make and model, dents and bumper stickers.

Law enforcement agencies across Texas have promoted the technology as a tool for investigating and reducing crime. Privacy advocates, meanwhile, have raised concerns about the amount of information the cameras collect and the potential for misuse.

The debate has drawn criticism and proposed restrictions from lawmakers in both major political parties.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gina Hinojosa has criticized Abbott over the state’s role in funding Flock cameras and has highlighted DPS’ use of the technology during her campaign.

“It’s the governor’s agencies that answer to him, who are sending out this money and paying for these Flock cameras across the state,” Hinojosa said in a September interview with the Texas Tribune.

Several Democratic and Republican lawmakers have said they plan to introduce legislation that would restrict or ban the cameras in Texas. Law enforcement leaders have said losing the technology could affect their ability to investigate crime while also supporting regulations governing its use.

Bailey said Johnson County considers the cameras an important law enforcement tool but acknowledged that the county could face difficulties maintaining them without state funding.

“Anything that helps assist us with law enforcement and not have to go to the taxpayers to increase property taxes to hire more individuals is good for Texas,” he said.

Security guards brought Garces Perez into the Austin federal courtroom in a wheelchair as the court considered whether federal assault and resisting charges against him would proceed. The judge ruled that the case could continue.

Garces Perez faces allegations that he struck an ICE agent with the side mirror of his car while fleeing an immigration stop shortly before another ICE agent shot him.

The hearing also revealed details about ICE enforcement practices and the evidence investigators used to support the charges.

ICE agents conduct random license plate checks

Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent Rick Bazan testified that ICE enforcement officers routinely drive around Austin and run license plates to identify people with immigration enforcement orders.

Bazan investigated the initial encounter between Garces Perez and two ICE officers, although he was not at the scene.

He said the officers involved in the Sept. 20 incident were conducting random checks when they saw Garces Perez picking up a food delivery order from a restaurant in his blue Toyota Corolla.

“They’re out there everywhere running license plates,” Bazan said.

During cross-examination, defense attorney Shane McMahon asked whether ICE agents can use government databases to check the immigration status associated with license plates.

“That’s right,” Bazan said.

Bazan also said the officers chose to stop Garces Perez after he left the restaurant rather than arrest him there because they feared he might flee on foot and because other people were present at the restaurant.

Investigator has not interviewed agent who shot Garces Perez

Bazan prepared the federal criminal complaint against Garces Perez after interviewing the driver and one of the ICE officers involved in the initial traffic stop.

The complaint identifies that officer as “D.F.” The officer who later shot Garces Perez, identified as “L.G.,” did not participate in Bazan’s interview.

Bazan testified that his team has not interviewed L.G. because a separate investigation covers the shooting.

He said investigators relied partly on footage from D.F.’s body camera when preparing the complaint.

Bazan also testified that L.G. had access to body-camera equipment but did not wear one during the incident. He said he did not know why.

Body camera footage leaves key moments unclear

Federal prosecutors presented about eight minutes of footage from D.F.’s body camera as evidence supporting the charges. The court has sealed the footage from public view, although people inside the courtroom watched it.

The video begins with the initial immigration stop. An ICE officer who did not wear a body camera stands near the driver’s side window and speaks to Garces Perez in Spanish.

Garces Perez then drives away despite the officer’s commands.

At that point, D.F.’s camera turns away from the vehicle, preventing viewers from seeing whether the car’s side mirror struck the officer.

Prosecutors presented a still image from the footage that they said showed the mirror making contact with the officer’s torso.

Bazan initially testified that the image showed contact. Under cross-examination, however, he acknowledged that contact was only “possible” because the officer’s hand partially blocked the mirror.

Prosecutors said other images more clearly showed contact but did not submit them during the hearing.

The video later shows D.F. pursuing Garces Perez and requesting assistance from the Texas Department of Public Safety. D.F. first called a DPS employee he knew and then contacted a DPS dispatcher.

D.F. eventually pulled over and turned off his body camera.

According to the criminal complaint, D.F. later spoke with L.G. by phone. L.G. allegedly told him that he shot Garces Perez because he feared the driver would hit him with his vehicle.

The body camera did not record that conversation because D.F. had already turned off the camera.

McMahon asked Bazan during cross-examination whether he had asked D.F. why he turned off the camera.

“You could have asked but you didn’t?” McMahon asked.

“No,” Bazan responded.

Trump pointed to Peterbilt’s Denton facility as an example of what he described as the results of his trade and economic policies. Peterbilt said tariffs implemented last year helped the company add more than 1,000 jobs at the Denton plant.

“Workers like you and companies like this have always been loyal to our country,” Trump said, criticizing previous administrations over foreign trade and manufacturing.

Trump also cited changes to federal emissions regulations and other policies affecting the trucking industry. He said manufacturing wages had increased since he took office and claimed the United States added 60,000 manufacturing jobs this year.

He also said heavy truck manufacturing and shipments had reached record levels under his administration.

Trump praised Peterbilt employees during the visit and recognized workers with family ties to the company. Sarah Renshaw, a Peterbilt events manager whose parents worked for the company, said the company’s growth allowed her son to join its workforce.

Trump also joked that he would buy and drive one of Peterbilt’s trucks if the Secret Service approved it.

The Denton visit also focused on the Texas Senate race.

Paxton joined Trump at the Peterbilt facility, where Trump praised the attorney general and Republican Senate nominee for supporting him during political battles.

Trump called Paxton a strong candidate for the Senate and criticized Democratic nominee James Talarico, using disparaging language to describe his opponent.

Paxton is challenging Talarico in the November election for the U.S. Senate seat. The race has drawn national attention as Republicans seek to retain the seat.

Trump’s visit came as his administration promotes manufacturing, trade and economic policies ahead of the midterm elections. White House officials have pointed to Peterbilt’s job growth and increased domestic truck production as examples of those policies’ effects.

The report from Our Schools Our Democracy and Every Texan found that at least 184 independent school districts could lose a combined $227 million in state funding because students accepted vouchers. Another 549 districts could lose an estimated $67 million.

The groups based their estimates on the state’s enrollment-based school funding system, which provides districts with roughly $8,000 in state funding for each student. Texas Comptroller data shows that 30% of voucher recipients previously attended public schools.

Gov. Greg Abbott pushed back against concerns in 2022 that vouchers would reduce funding for public schools.

“If you like the public school your child is attending, it will still be fully funded,” Abbott said at the time.

Abbott later made school vouchers a major issue during the 2024 Republican state legislative primaries, supporting candidates who backed the program.

The Texas Education Freedom Accounts (TEFA) program became law in 2025 and issued its first vouchers for the 2026-27 school year. More than 200,000 students applied, exceeding the program’s initial $1 billion funding capacity. The state awarded more than 120,000 vouchers, leaving about 100,000 applicants on a waiting list.

The Texas Comptroller’s Office, which oversees TEFA, has asked lawmakers to consider increasing the program’s funding to $2 billion. The office did not respond to a request for comment.

Houston ISD reported 1,207 students who accepted vouchers and left the district. The Greater Houston area also recorded the most voucher applications statewide.

Other large districts reported significant student losses. Dallas ISD lost 807 students, San Antonio ISD lost 450, Austin ISD lost 301 and Fort Worth ISD lost 576 students through the voucher program.

Dee Carney, executive director of Our Schools Our Democracy, urged lawmakers in September not to increase voucher funding until they have more information about its effects on public schools.

“Voucher supporters promised that public schools would not be harmed by the voucher program because it comes from a different pot of money,” Carney said. “But vouchers have a public school price tag. There is an impact on public schools whenever the child leaves and the revenue with them.”

More than 700 school districts reported at least one student leaving public schools through the voucher program, according to the report.

The groups said smaller and rural districts could face greater challenges because they cannot quickly reduce expenses when enrollment falls. Carney said districts still must pay fixed costs such as transportation, utilities, insurance and teacher salaries even when students leave.

“A public school district can’t reduce expenses dollar for dollar when a student leaves with a voucher because many of those costs, such as transportation, utilities, insurance, teachers – those are fixed costs,” Carney said.

Carney said districts could face difficult decisions if funding losses continue, including reductions in teachers, programs, extracurricular activities and student services, as well as potential school closures.

The budget represents a slight decrease from METRO’s roughly $2 billion budget last year.

Several members of the public criticized the allocation for road improvements during the board meeting. They argued that the city of Houston, rather than the transit authority, should handle road repaving.

Some attendees also raised concerns about access and transit service, while others questioned METRO’s decision to shelve the METRONext Project, a 2019 initiative focused on expanding and improving the region’s transit system.

Robin Holzer, executive director of transit advocacy group LINK Houston, said METRO could use the $40 million for other transit priorities.

“Using this $40 million instead to buy more buses, expand service hours or build safer transit infrastructure into great streets, could all make real improvements for the people who ride every day,” Holzer said.

METRO Chair Elizabeth Gonzalez Brock defended the allocation, saying the funding would help maintain transit infrastructure and support rider safety.

“This is making sure we give just a basic standard of ridership,” Gonzalez Brock said. “People deserve to have good roads to ride on and deserve to have the bus shelters in place … and sidewalks.”

Gonzalez Brock also said METRO has a responsibility to ensure safe conditions for its riders.

“We also owe it to our riders to make sure they are safe,” she said.

About 60% of Texas homeowners age 65 and older no longer pay school property taxes following additional cuts approved in 2025, according to an analysis from the office of state Sen. Paul Bettencourt, R-Houston.

The changes have reduced the tax burden for homeowners such as Jane Lindsley, a 72-year-old retired bookkeeper in Hays County. Her school property tax bill fell to zero last year, reducing her overall property tax bill more than 40%.

“I was ecstatic,” Lindsley said. “I’m like, ‘this is the only thing in my life that’s going down.’ I can actually afford to pay.”

Texas lawmakers have directed billions of dollars in state revenue toward lowering school property tax rates, limited how much local governments can increase property taxes without voter approval and increased homestead exemptions.

The Legislature increased the school district homestead exemption to $140,000 last year. The state’s additional senior homestead exemption can reduce the taxable value of a qualifying homeowner’s property by another $60,000, bringing the total potential exemption to $200,000 for homeowners age 65 and older and qualifying homeowners with disabilities.

The changes helped reduce the average school property tax bill for general homesteads 13.6% to $896 last year, according to Bettencourt’s office. The average bill for seniors fell about 33% to $380.

Bettencourt, who authored several property tax cuts, said lawmakers want to help older Texans who have spent decades paying property taxes remain in their homes.

At the same time, tax policy experts have raised questions about how the state distributes the benefits and who ultimately carries the cost of replacing local property tax revenue.

The state has used surplus revenue from other taxes to finance school property tax reductions. Some analysts describe the approach as a transfer of resources from younger and working-age Texans to older homeowners, who generally hold more housing wealth.

Janelle Fritts, a senior policy analyst at the conservative Tax Foundation’s Center for State Tax Policy, said some younger Texans may need tax relief more than retirees with substantial savings.

Derrick Wilson, chairman of the Texas Young Republican Federation, also questioned the emphasis on senior homeowners as younger Texans face challenges purchasing homes.

“We don’t begrudge older generations for not wanting to be taxed out of their homes,” Wilson said. “But it does seem foundationally unfair to grant tax relief to an older generation that’s been voting for bonds and things that we still have to pay for.”

Supporters of the senior exemptions point to the financial pressures facing many older Texans. More than half of older adults in Texas fall below the Elder Index, a measure of the income needed to cover basic expenses, according to Caitlin Covey of the University of Massachusetts Boston’s Gerontology Institute.

Many older homeowners also face rising insurance, utility, health care and other household costs even after paying off their mortgages.

Lindsley said her homeowners insurance premium more than doubled after her insurer raised its rates. She also spends more on car insurance, gasoline, groceries and health care.

She receives about $4,400 a month from Social Security and an annuity. Despite eliminating her school property tax bill, she still paid more than $1,000 in other property taxes on her $546,000 home last year.

Texas’ aging population could increase the cost of senior property tax exemptions. The number of Texans age 65 and older could rise from about 3.9 million in 2020 to 7.5 million in 2050, according to projections from the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service at the University of Virginia.

The Texas comptroller’s office has also projected that the cost of senior exemptions will grow faster than exemptions available to homeowners generally.

Meanwhile, state lawmakers face questions about the long-term cost of the property tax strategy. Texas committed $51 billion last year to reducing school property taxes, with lawmakers set to continue funding the effort every two years.

Republican leaders have proposed additional cuts. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has proposed extending the senior school property tax exemption to homeowners age 55 and older and increasing the general homestead exemption. Gov. Greg Abbott has proposed eliminating school property taxes for all homeowners.

Policy experts have also proposed more targeted approaches, including a “circuit breaker” that would limit property tax payments based on a household’s income rather than age or homeownership status.

Such a system could provide relief to homeowners and renters whose housing costs consume a large share of their income. Texas currently lacks a mechanism used in some other states to administer such a program.

Some experts also argue that expanding housing options could help older Texans who want to downsize without leaving their communities. Possible options include accessory dwelling units, duplexes and smaller apartment buildings.

For some homeowners, however, the existing tax system remains tied to the services property taxes support.

Steven Klinek, a Pharr homeowner who turned 65 in June, said he expects to save money through the senior exemption but has never objected to paying property taxes.

Klinek, who retired from United Parcel Service in 2020, said property taxes helped fund a dual-credit program that allowed his youngest son to earn two years of college credit through South Texas College before attending the University of Texas at El Paso.

“I see what my community does with their tax dollars,” Klinek said. “I see it on paper, I see it in my pocketbook, and I see what happens to kids. So that’s why I don’t have a problem paying my property taxes.”

The project cost includes a 5% contingency and will prepare the right-of-way, install traffic signs and barricades, and construct the signal system.

The system will include signal poles, electrical conduits, vehicle and pedestrian signal heads, battery backup and radar vehicle detectors, according to a recent bid solicitation.

The intersection has experienced growing traffic from the nearby 100-acre Katy Park sports complex, the 46-acre Green at Katy Park mixed-use development and The Market at Katy Park.

The Market at Katy Park includes a 117,000-square-foot H-E-B with gas pumps, a car wash and a drive-thru pharmacy.

The new signal will use standard red, yellow and green lights and could become operational in summer 2027. A city official said Monday that material delivery for traffic signals can take about six months.

The contract lists June 13, 2027, as the expected operational date.

The project follows the installation of another traffic signal at Morton and Katy Hockley Road in August.

A city official said the new signal will coordinate with the traffic light near H-E-B to help maintain traffic flow through the area.

H-E-B Katy Park opened at 24924 Morton Ranch Road in February 2024. The store recorded about 2.5 million visitors in 2025 and ranked as the top-performing Katy location, according to a Green at Katy Park leasing brochure.

A Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation filing lists the project as a 4,335-square-foot renovation of an existing suite at 600 Travis St. Work is scheduled to start Oct. 30 and finish Dec. 31, although project details can change.

Houston-based Ziegler Cooper Architects will design the expansion. The firm will privately fund the project.

Buzbee told Chron that his firm has occupied space in the 75-story tower since 2008 and that the project marks its fourth expansion.

“We need the space,” Buzbee said. “We are bursting at the seams with people on top of one another. Or at least it feels that way.”

The expansion will add space to Suite 6910 but will not replicate the firm’s main office, which occupies the entire 75th floor.

Buzbee described the main office as a showcase featuring art, high-end finishes and views of Houston.

The JPMorgan Chase Tower recently lost its status as the tallest building in Texas to Austin’s Waterline, which rises 1,025 feet. The Austin tower stands 23 feet taller than the Houston skyscraper.

Asked whether he would help Houston reclaim the state’s tallest-building title, Buzbee said, “Austin can go suck an egg. Houston reigns supreme.”

The office expansion comes shortly after Buzbee purchased a $15.5 million mansion in River Oaks next to his home. He said he and his wife planned to donate the property to Habitat for Humanity so workers could reuse materials after its demolition.

Asked about the amount of space he wants, Buzbee said, “I need as much space as I want. I appreciate nice spaces. Life is short.”