(plaintiff owned land zoned agricultural and claimed that 2009 amendment to county zoning ordinance making it easier for wind energy development companies to build wind farms on adjacent land constituted a taking of her property rights on the basis that wind farm development would deprive her property of "full extent of kinetic energy of the wind and air as it enters the property subjecting it to shadow flicker and reduction of light, severe noise, possible ice throw and blade throws, interference with radar, cell phone, GPS, television, and other wireless communications, increased likelihood of lightening damage and stray voltage, increased electromagnetic radiation, prevention, prevention of crop dusting, drying out her land, and killing raptors"; trial court dismissed case; appellate court affirmed on basis that plaintiff's claim properly characterized as nuisance claim; no constitutional rights violated; ordinance simply modest legislative encouragement of wind farming and is within constitutional authority of county).