The Forest Hill town council recently enacted an amendment to its zoning code, with a provision purporting to regulate "alternative energy" land uses such as "wind turbines" as "potential nuisances," and requiring a special permit from the town council for any wind turbines to be located in the municipality. The council enacted the amendment along with legislative findings of fact that wind turbines can generate excess noise, obstruct the views and diminish property values of neighboring properties, and create "shadow flicker," i.e. the rotating wind turbine blades would cast flickering shadows upon stationary objects. Under the regulation, the town council set up a special zone on the undeveloped outskirts of the municipality which allowed for "transferrable shadow flicker" rights (TSFRs). These TSFR's court be utilized by homeowners whose proposed wind turbines would cause shadow flicker on neighboring properties. Such wind turbines would not be eligible for a special permit. Instead, these homeowners were eligible to receive ownership rights to a specified wind turbine constructed by the municipality in the special district. The electricity generated by that wind turbine in turn would be purchased by the local utility company, in the form of a 15% discount on the homeowner's utility bill. How would a court likely rule on a challenge by Rock Sowers to enforcement of the new zoning ordinance on his property and his desired plans to construct a wind turbine?