FACT-CHECK: Assessing the Accuracy of MKE Urban Stables’ Public Claims About the October 29 ICE Incident

Originally published on Heather’s Substack on 12/3/25

On October 29, 2025, I arrived at MKE Urban Stables (I call it the barn) expecting an ordinary volunteer shift.

Instead, I pulled into a parking lot filled with unmarked vehicles, masked (mostly) men in tactical gear, and a man wearing fatigues with an “FBI” vest. I was immediately concerned about the safety of the animals who live at the barn.

When I learned that agents were using the barn’s parking lot, I said, “We do learning and therapy here. You need to leave. Now.”

A second volunteer – Amanda Owen – arrived and joined me in calling for the agents to leave the parking lot.

They left within minutes.

What happened next — Executive Director Mary McIntosh’s dismissive, confrontational reaction to my concerns; her insistence that the agents “had every right to be there”; her suggestion the activity might continue; and my abrupt dismissal just hours later — is now widely known because of my first article about the incident and subsequent media coverage.

You can read it here.

My second article documented the longstanding pattern of toxic leadership, emotional abuse, and high turnover under McIntosh’s tenure. I heard from former staff, former volunteers, equine professionals, and even a former board member — many of whom reached out privately to say that what happened to me “fits a much deeper pattern.”

You can read the second article here.

Their support has meant more than I can say. And it highlights something important: The bad press now facing MKE Urban Stables was entirely preventable. It is the direct result of leadership failures and the board’s unwillingness to take action despite years of warnings.

This article fact-checks the claims made publicly by MKE Urban Stables and by board president Ed Krishok, comparing them to the actual record, eyewitness accounts, and direct statements made by the board itself.

1. Did I violate a “policy” by not reporting the activity before confronting agents?

What MKE Urban Stables says

In the organization’s public statement (attached below):

“(The volunteer) did not report the activity to MKE Urban Stables staff until after they confronted the law enforcement officers, which is a violation of our volunteer policies.”

In the Nov. 21 email to Supervisor Martinez (attached below), Krishok repeats the same point:

“They did not report the activity to MKE Urban Stables staff until after they confronted the law enforcement officers, which is a violation of our volunteer policies.”

What the records show

No such policy existed on Oct. 29.

During my Nov. 19 phone call with board president Ed Krishok, he did not reference any existing reporting policy. Instead, he suggested that a process would need to be created, describing something like a future “telephone tree” for volunteers to use.

He also acknowledged that most staff do not arrive until roughly two hours after early-morning volunteers begin, making it physically impossible to “immediately notify staff” under any rule in place at the time.

To be clear, morning crews arrive between 6:45 and 7 a.m., and the only staff member usually present is the barn manager. On the morning of Oct. 29, they were on medical leave, so morning chores were staffed entirely by volunteers.

What volunteer policies actually covered

I no longer have my original volunteer-training documents because they covered routine barn procedures (and that was two years ago). But I clearly recall — and multiple current volunteers confirmed — that the documents covered:

  • equine-handling safety

  • barn protocols

  • emergency procedures inside the barn

  • injury-reporting forms

They did not include:

  • instructions for approaching or avoiding unknown individuals

  • law-enforcement interaction procedures

  • guidance about the parking lot

  • early-morning reporting requirements

  • any chain of command when staff are not on site

Nothing in the known volunteer materials addresses what unfolded on Oct. 29.

Contradictory evidence from the board president

In his Dec. 2 email to Supervisor Martinez (attached below), Krishok wrote:

“Our Board convened an emergency meeting last week and directed that our policies be clarified and strengthened with explicit procedures related to ICE activity.”

This is a clear admission that the procedures did not previously exist — directly contradicting the claim that I violated them.

Conclusion

The claim that a policy existed on Oct. 29 requiring volunteers to notify staff before approaching unknown individuals is not supported by any document, volunteer account, or statement made by the board president himself.

2. Did confronting the agents create a safety risk, as the Stables claims?

What MKE Urban Stables says

“(The volunteer’s) independent confrontation with the officers created a potential safety risk to themselves and others on site.”

What the records show

No safety concerns were raised to me or Amanda at the time.

On Oct. 29, during my interactions with McIntosh, she did not mention:

  • my safety

  • Amanda’s safety

  • safety of the horses

  • safety of special education students arriving from a local high school

Instead, her first words were:

“You had no right to do that.”

She repeated that if we “didn’t like it,” we could “leave and not come back.”

The dismissal notice sent to me referenced “not following procedure” — never safety. You can find the screenshot of the email attached to the first article I wrote.

Conclusion

There is no evidence that safety concerns motivated my dismissal. This language appears only after media and county officials began asking questions.

Unanswered Question #1:
If safety was truly the concern, why was it never raised on Oct. 29, never referenced in the dismissal email, and never mentioned until after public scrutiny began?

3. Did my social media post strain the Stables’ partnership with MPD?

What MKE Urban Stables says

“Posting about the incident publicly before confirming that MPD had no involvement strained this important relationship.”

What the records show

My initial Facebook post did not name MKE Urban Stables (attached below). It included only:

  • masked agents

  • my interaction with them

  • the belief that I had disrupted a staging

The location was not revealed until my November 2 Substack article (linked above).

MPD told the Stables they had no involvement and were unaware of ICE’s plans.

At no point did MPD attribute any strain to my social media post.

Conclusion

The claim that MPD relations were harmed by my initial post is not supported by the timeline or by MPD’s comments.

Unanswered Question #2:
If MPD did not attribute any strain to my post, why does MKE Urban Stables continue to publicly suggest that I damaged the partnership?

4. Was the dismissal unrelated to the ICE incident?

What MKE Urban Stables says

“The volunteer was not dismissed for disrupting an ICE staging.”

What the records show

Two volunteers were present — myself and Amanda Owen.

Both of us:

  • approached the agents

  • took photos

  • spoke to them

  • were told by McIntosh that if we “didn’t like it,” we could “leave and not come back”

Only one volunteer was dismissed.

Amanda Owen wrote on a Reddit thread:

“Heather was fired and I was not. There definitely was a double standard.”

And:

“The executive director threatening employees and volunteers is vile and disgusting, inexcusable behavior.”

No explanation for the differing treatment has ever been offered.

Conclusion

The claim that the dismissal was unrelated to the ICE encounter is contradicted by the unequal treatment of two volunteers involved in the same actions.

Unanswered Question #3:
If the dismissal truly had nothing to do with the incident, why was I the only volunteer dismissed — and why has no explanation been provided for that disparity by either the barn or by Ed Krishok?

5. Did policies exist on Oct. 29 regarding ICE or law-enforcement presence?

What MKE Urban Stables says

“This is a violation of our volunteer policies.”

What the records show

In his Dec. 2 email to Supervisor Martinez (attached below), Krishok was responding to Martinez’s request that Krishok provide the policy he keeps mentioning. Instead of transparency, Krishok instead invited Martinez to tour the facility where then, and only then, he could view policies and guidelines.

Krishok wrote:

“We would welcome the opportunity to host you at MKE Urban Stables so you can review our volunteer policies and guidelines firsthand. While we are happy to share the written documents, we believe a visit to the Stables—where we can walk you through how our programs operate and how these policies apply in practice—would provide the clearest and most meaningful understanding."

And:

“We are now moving quickly to develop and implement (ICE) policies, including protocols to protect minors and other vulnerable participants should ICE or any other federal enforcement entity appear onsite. MKE Urban Stables is a mental wellness and community outreach center, ICE enforcement activities have no place here.”

This statement confirms:

  • these protocols did not exist on Oct. 29

  • the board recognized their absence

  • new procedures were being created after the incident

  • this is the first time any communication from the barn confirms its clients could be harmed by law enforcement using the parking lot as a staging ground

No volunteer or staff member I interviewed — current or former — recalled any prior policy addressing ICE, law enforcement, or parking-lot interactions.

Conclusion

The Stables’ public statement contradicts the board president’s own admission that relevant policies had to be created after the incident.

Unanswered Question #4:
If the policies did not exist and had to be created afterward, why is the public statement claiming otherwise?

Overall Conclusion

Across multiple public statements and direct communications, MKE Urban Stables says that:

  • I violated policy

  • safety was compromised

  • MPD relations were harmed

  • dismissal was unrelated to the incident

  • procedures existed

The evidence shows to the contrary:

  • No such policy existed.

  • Safety concerns were never mentioned until after media inquiries.

  • MPD did not report strain from my initial post.

  • Two volunteers acted identically, but only one was dismissed.

  • Policies were created after the incident.

  • Early-morning volunteers were left without any guidance.

  • My initial post did not name MKE Urban Stables.

Final Thoughts

This situation was not the result of volunteers speaking up. It has grown into a life of its own because Mary McIntosh failed to:

  • provide clear safety procedures

  • protect early-morning volunteers

  • communicate consistently

  • express any accountability

  • uphold the mission of a therapy-focused nonprofit

This is also on the board because, despite years of warnings about McIntosh’s habit of creating a hostile work environment, it has chosen not to act in the best interest of the barn’s staff or the vulnerable populations it serves.

And this is with Milwaukee County District Attorney Kent Lovern serving as board president for a period of time and who remains an active member of the board.

MKE Urban Stables is now on:

  • its 4th barn manager in 4–5 years

  • at least its 3rd volunteer coordinator in that same period

In a staff of roughly five people, that represents exceptionally high turnover despite Krishok’s claim to the contrary during our Zoom conversation last month.

The solution is straightforward:

Replace Mary McIntosh with a leader who understands equine-assisted therapy, has a servant-leadership mindset, respects professional expertise, and fosters a workplace where people want to stay.

Only then can MKE Urban Stables begin to rebuild trust — with volunteers, with its community partners, and with the public it exists to serve.

Previous
Previous

The road to an AI disaster is paved by rubber spines of small-town politicians.

Next
Next

A Pattern of Harm: Inside the Hostile Work Environment at MKE Urban Stables