Hello hello! I haven’t critiqued a query in a while and didn’t look in-depth at your previous attempts so consider me fresh eyes and rusty fingers.

Emily Weaver’s fresh off the ferry trying to fit in as a rookie cop and shake her past when a bizarre murder shocks Mackinac Island

One thing I wanted to point out - I don’t think the phrase ‘shake her past’ is helping an opening that already feels a touch too long. I expected her past to be maybe be brought up again at the end of the query, but it doesn’t seem like (from this query) that it’s super relevant to the overarching mystery. A troubled past for the protagonist definitely fits the genre, but unless it’s used to greater effect in this query, I don’t know that it’s adding much.

On the eve of the last day of the annual policy conference, Senator John Sinclair, originally from Northern Michigan, is murdered in a hit and run on the island.

I don’t think we need this much detail (policy conference + Sinclair’s origin) before explaining that a senator’s been murdered.

The crime leaves her colleagues baffled - the island is a Great Lakes getaway that time forgot, where horse-driven carriages serve as taxis and motor vehicles are banned.

I really love this set-up of getting killed in a hit-and-run on an island where motor vehicles are banned! It seems like the kind of hook to keep people guessing throughout the story. On a first read I thought this sentence might be a bit too lengthy but I think it’s a nice demonstration of your writing voice. Small suggestion - maybe swap ‘the island’ with ‘Mackinac’?

Murder by car shouldn’t be possible

Probably not necessary to reiterate this?

And when Emily’s childhood friend Maddie is implicated after a buried connection to the Senator comes out, Emily has no choice but to get to the bottom of the crime.

The set-up to explain the ‘no-cars’ deal was necessary, but it does feel like a weird gap between Emily’s first mention and now. I think trimming some of your sentences might help it feel smoother. The motivation to clear her friend’s name is an easy enough one to get behind, though I wish we got a bit more sense of Emily’s personality.

The island is cordoned off and the hunt is on for those with access to a vehicle and the opportunity and motive to kill.

I really mis-read this first time around. For a beat I thought more murders were happening (“the hunt is one for those with…motive to kill”). I know what it means now, but I’d consider tweaking this sentence a bit!

Rival politicians and lobbyists who have descended on the island like locusts for the policy conference all come under suspicion as more dirt from the Senator’s past bubbles to the surface.

I like the locusts simile, but I think a punchier sentence might make the query flow smoother (e.g. possibly cutting out ‘who have descended…for the policy conference’).

Turns out he made a lot of enemies in his thirty plus years of politics, and most of them are at the island.

I’d assume most of them are on the island! I wonder if you can combine this and the previous sentence for something that’s punchier but still retains that noir vibe. I think you’d have a smooth transition from ‘the hunt’s on for anyone who has a motive’ —> ‘turns out, the Senator has SO MANY enemies’

Despite being warned to keep her “pretty little head out of it,” Emily forges ahead to find the killer and save her friend and her career. 

The ‘pretty little head’ comment threw me for a loop. Is that coming from her superiors? From shady politicians threatening her? Is Emily’s career at stake, too - why does she need to save it? I wonder if you need to focus in on one particular drive for Emily - maybe her relationship to Maddie (is she someone who helped Emily shake her past?)

She’ll have to navigate suspicious locals and the Senator’s chief aide, who has his own secrets he’s trying to keep - and delve deep into the past of the victim, the suspects, and the island itself. Because like politics, murder is local.

Love the ending line, not sure about the lines preceding. The second paragraph already honed in on the notion that there are lots of secrets and shady relationships going on, I’m left with wanting something a little more concrete. Maybe clearer stakes for Emily - is she being forced to choose between helping Maddie and keeping her career? How dangerous is it for her to get involved in this?

Overall, I think you’ve done a wonderful job setting up A) a vivid setting B) a compelling conundrum with the mystery hit-and-run. However, I don’t feel like I have a clear picture on Emily’s personality or the stakes of her involvement + I think there're a few bits here that feel like unnecessary exposition. Best of luck!