OK, but other than to obfuscate, why exactly were they always presented separately? That's patently ridiculous. And you wonder why those of us who think sporting facilities are usually a waste of money get our knickers in a knot.
I can only guess they were presented separately because they are quite different in funding, function and post game usage.
The facilities built for the games are all being financed through j/vs between the feds, the province and municipalities or institutions. The village adds in a component of private sector financing into the mix.
Post games, the facilities built for the games become sporting legacies and/or (depending on your perspective) cash drains. The housing built for the village becomes either market condos for sale or affordable housing as part of mixed use area/development.
Co-mingling those budgets would have just led to the concern that money raised from the sale of the private units was not going to support housing but, rather, supporting those "white elephant" sporting venues.
I am quite comfortable with the two budget approach in situations like this. I get, however, that some might not be.
What I can't stomach, though, is media and opposition critics (and, I should declare, I generally {almost exclusively} vote conservative) lying about the amount over budget these games are, or may be, by conveniently forgetting that the total of the two budgets back in 2009 is very close to what the games seem to be costing now.
Like I said, I am no "liberal" but hearing that in 2009 they created a budget for something like this with very little at the time but a vision and blank piece of paper and that they are now within 5% of that budget is something I am more inclined to congratulate them on than criticize them on.
I get why the opposition might stretch the truth a bit but I have no idea why the media is doing so. I asked this question of Paul Bliss (he was the voice on the recent "$1.1B over budget" piece on CTV) why he would say this when his own network showed the cost in 2009 as $2.4B and he has, to this point, chosen to ignore the question.