Although he has not yet made an official decision, city Councilor William H. Walsh is now eligible to run for a sixth term-- despite his recent felony convictions.

State Supreme Court Justice Neil Lynch decided this month that, while state law pre- vents Walsh from serving the rest of his current term, it does not bar him from running again--even from prison, the Cambridge Chronicle reported Thursday.

Walsh was convicted on 41 counts of bank fraud, conspiracy and submitting false statements to a federally insured bank. He was sentenced to an 18-month prison term two weeks ago.

In reaction to the possibility that Walsh may run again, several council members have sponsored a resolution to change the state law.

"We have some pending legislation which would bar a person convicted of a felony from serving in an elected capacity," said Councillor Kathleen L. Born.

Councillor's Francis H. Duehay '55 and Katherine Traintafillou support such a change in the law. "People who have been convicted of a felony should not be able to serve on the council." Duehay said.

"Walsh's refusal to face reality and resign is quite inappropriate and unnecessary." Triantafillou said.

But not everyone on the council agrees that Walsh should be barred from serving another term.

"It's not a cut-and-dry issue," said Councillors Sheila T. Russell, one of Walsh's political allies. "If we said that a person could never run again [after being convicted of a felony] we might be violating that person's rights."

Russell, who said she spoke to Walsh recently, argued that the convicted ex-councillor should be treated like any other candidate once he completes his sentence.

("If Mr. Walsh has paid his debt, I don't see why he shouldn't run again,") Russell said. "He could be an effective councillor again."

Others said the issue should be left to the voters.

"I think the important thing is to leave it up to the people to decide who should represent them," said James J. McSweeney, who ran in the last city council election and finished tenth, one place away from winning a seat.

McSweeney has filed a lawsuit to claim Walsh's seat, which is currently slated to go to Anthony Galluccio.

Although Galluccio actually finished two places behind McSweeney in the general election, Cambridge's system of proportional representation dictates that officials consider only ballots cast for Walsh in deciding who will fill his seat.

Because voters who cast first-place ballots for Walsh tended to support Galluccio over McSweeney as a second choice, Galluccio will win Walsh's position.

Although Walsh is out of the political picture for now, observers said he may return.

In fact, some councillors said they expect Walsh to run in the next election, thanks to Lynch's ruling.

"It wouldn't surprise me if he ran again," Russell said. Traintafillou agreed that his political reemergence is a definite possibility.

"I would expect anything from him," she added.

Walsh, who could not be reached for this article, told the Cambridge Chronicle last week that, if he did run, he would expect to win.

"I feel like I could top the ticket it I can tomorrow morning," he said.

While Traintafillou agreed that Walsh has retained his political following, she argued that many voters would be put off by his criminal record.

"There is always a certain segment that ascribes to his political views, but there are also others that could represent them," she said.

Although Walsh has not made it clear whether or not he will run again, he has left the door open.

"I'll have to make my mind up in time," Walsh told the Chronicle. "I'll have to do what's best for me."