As fences go, the $700,000 one that just went up around the campus home of UC Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks has to be one for the record books.

Originally budgeted at $270,000, the painted steel fence was to be built behind a hedge, in a manner that would “respect the historical character of the house and the grounds” of 105-year-old University House.

Then came a series of incidents in which UC Berkeley officials said protesters “damaged the home and sprayed graffiti on the exterior walls.” That prompted campus police to recommend that the fence be bulked up and moved farther from the home, to keep outsiders from getting within reach of the building.

In addition to the 7-foot-tall fence, the new plan included heavy-duty driveway gates, security cameras and equipment to allow the fence’s walkway gates to be opened from inside the house.

“This required 500 feet of conduits, as well as electronics,” according to an official summary provided to us.

Then, in the summer of 2015, well after construction got under way, students and professors unhappy about the amount of public space being walled off by the fence cried foul.

Campus officials responded by moving it back closer to the house — though not as close as the original design called for.

In the process, they ripped out the electronically controlled driveway gate and added custom-built gates at both the front and back entries — each adorned with a pair of golden bears.

Officials say those changes added $200,000 to the tab. As of the most recent tally, the campus had spent $65,000 on various fence designs, $565,000 on materials and labor, and $69,000 on administration and other costs.

Total: just shy of $700,000. And that’s without all the new landscaping that’s also gone in.

The good news, says campus spokesman Dan Mogulof, is that “all this is going to result in about $200,000 in annual savings — because the university’s police will be able to reduce their manpower needs to provide security for the house.”

On the bay: Despite overwhelming political support and only token opposition, backers of a $12-dollar-a-year parcel tax to restore the bay are scrambling to come up with enough money to carry their campaign to victory across nine Bay Area counties next month.

Measure AA would raise more than $500 million over 20 years to protect the shoreline from climate change-related rising seas and flooding.

And while a recent poll by Fairbank, Maslin, Maulin, Metz and Associates showed the measure looked good to 77 percent of voters, only 40 percent said they would “definitely” vote for it. That’s far below the two-thirds overall vote needed to pass it.

So time for a push, right? The problem is that even though politicians including Gov. Jerry Brown and Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer support Measure AA, consultant Adam Alberti tells us supporters have fallen $500,000 short of the $3 million they feel they need to get the message out.

Sugar rush: San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin lost his bid to keep candy bars in vending machines at City Hall, but as far as he’s concerned, the story still has a sweet ending.

“There are a thousand adults who work in this building who can make their own choices about what foods they want to consume, and I for one think we should be able to get a Kit Kat bar,” Peskin said before being on the losing end of a 10-1 vote last week.

A few days later he got a letter from the folks who run the downstairs cafe, telling him that they had just renewed their lease — and that the new rules would not affect them until 2020.

“So do not despair,” the letter said. “You can enjoy your favorite junk food for four more years.”

Merger: If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em.

That seems to be the axiom of two of San Francisco’s biggest lobbying and PR firms, which are about to join forces under the banner Lighthouse Public Affairs after years of slugging it out for many of the same clients.

So now, Barbary Coast Consulting, headed by onetime City Hall aide Alex Clemens — his clients include Cisco, Dolby and the Giants — will join up with Goodyear, Peterson, Hayward and Associates, which lists AT&T, Hearst Corp. (owner of The Chronicle), Target and Kilroy Realty among its clients.

Partners Rich Peterson (a prolific fundraiser for both Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and Mayor Ed Lee) and Boe Hayward (a former aide to Supervisor Bevan Dufty) have been going it alone since the recent exit of partner Charlie Goodyear.

“We have developed a pretty fierce and respectful rivalry,” Clemens said of his relationship with his soon-to-be partners. “But we are more similar than dissimilar, and thought there were advantages to our clients and our careers to contemplate joining forces.”

Not to mention advantages to joining revenue — which, we’re told, will total about $4.5 million a year from lobbying and other activities. Pretty much making them among the biggest kids on the block.

And finally: Reader Paul Dembry, on the Board of Supervisors putting a measure to lower the voting age in San Francisco to 16 in local elections:

“San Francisco raises the smoking age to 21 because 18-year-olds are not mature enough to make good decisions about tobacco — then San Francisco wants to lower the voting age to 16, because 16-year-olds are mature enough to make good voting decisions?”

Something like that.

San Francisco Chronicle columnists Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross appear Sundays, Mondays and Wednesdays. Matier can be seen on the KPIX TV morning and evening news. He can also be heard on KCBS radio Monday through Friday at 7:50 a.m. and 5:50 p.m. Got a tip? Call (415) 777-8815, or email matierandross@sfchronicle.com. Twitter: @matierandross