Unfortunately there are two different concepts of "we" at play. The "we" who get pushed out of our neighborhoods by tourism-driven rent increases will most certainly not be the "we" who decide what's more important.
Vote. That's how democracy works. If you lose, you accept your loss.
And when you say "apartment", I'm assuming you mean with permission from your landlord/management company with a lease that doesn't prohibit unapproved sublets, right? Because to do otherwise would violate their property rights.
> Its up to the local populace to decide what they want.
Thinking that's the solution to every problem is rather naive. For one thing, it's a great way to abuse minorities for the minor benefit of majorities.
More importantly, it ignores the fact that actions can have externalities far beyond a local jurisdiction. Just like a town shouldn't be able to "vote" to rob everyone who drives on their highway (or, more realistically, eliminate air quality controls), neither should it be allowed to have complete control over travel regulations. Travelers might not be a constituent in local elections, but travel and interstate commerce does have key externalities.
But will it last as local jurisdictions add short-term rental restrictions? That's the question. Those governments are accountable to their local voters, not AirBnB, and definitely not the travelers who use it.